Why? Just relax a bit. Election results (you know, actual votes) will be trickling in by just past 11 pm Thursday night. The outcome is not in doubt. Starmer will be kissing the ring on Friday.
I’m hugely relaxed. After a busy week I’m back in Surrey sitting with dogs watching Wimbledon.
I just need an opinion poll. Or several.
Why?
Duh. Because I enjoy politics and political betting. And I love General Elections. This one in particular. It has been the most enjoyable campaign of my life.
Elections are exciting when its a close result. This is just plain boring, the only thing of interest is what happens the Conservatives when they lose.
Elections are exciting when one's own side is looking like winning, or the side one doesn't like is looking like losing. I can see that for Conservative (or SNP) supporters this election would be boring, or at best morbidly fascinating. But for Labour supporters, Reform supporters and - with the usual caveats - Lib Dem supporters this is an exciting election.
My problem - and I do realise this is a genuine character flaw - is that, in spite of the fact that I am pretty sure the next Parliament is going to be very bad for me financially and possess a lot of risks to my livelihood and ability to support my family - in spite of all of that - there is still within me that anarchist disruptor that Heathener was ascribing to Leon.
I have often said I am only a Libertarian because I am too frightened to be an anarchist. I view the old Chinese proverb about 'Living in Interesting times' as a blessing rather than the curse it is intended to be. And this is self destructive and stupid but I do recognise it in myself and it is something I can't completely supress.
So a big bit of me wants to see the Tories get absolutely slaughtered even though it means a Labour Government that will be bad for me and my family.
A bit of me wants to see Reform gain seats just for the laugh and the horror even though I would not myself vote for them in a million years.
I am enjoying all the angst of the French election results because it maks life more interesting even though it could be bad for France and the rest of Europe including the UK.
But all this is the detached observer and I would never actively want to help any of this happen (well except perhaps the destruction of the Tory party but that is for other reasons).
This is why I am so looking forward to Thursday night and hoping it won't all be a boring damp squip.
When did Leon hack your account? Except for the LACK of random words in capitals, I’d almost believe it.
The difference is the lack of shrapnel when things don't go the way I want.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Interesting. 33yrs old you say? Sounds more like the set of beliefs that are prevalent at Uni.
Don't forget that 148gers is a lecturer at a uni, and probably still young enough to believe that the cool undergrads they teach are their friends, and hanging out with them in the Uni bar is in no way a bir creepy...
What's a cool undergrad?
This argument is bizarre. If you can predict resource scarcity and you are ex hypothesi looking to make long term investments you should be rejoicing. Buy emerging markets and commodity ETFs and a bit of Nvidia. You're now future proof.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Why would water scarcity INCREASE in a warmer world, which as we all know gives increased moisture in the atmosphere, and more rain?
Why? Just relax a bit. Election results (you know, actual votes) will be trickling in by just past 11 pm Thursday night. The outcome is not in doubt. Starmer will be kissing the ring on Friday.
I’m hugely relaxed. After a busy week I’m back in Surrey sitting with dogs watching Wimbledon.
I just need an opinion poll. Or several.
Why?
Duh. Because I enjoy politics and political betting. And I love General Elections. This one in particular. It has been the most enjoyable campaign of my life.
Elections are exciting when its a close result. This is just plain boring, the only thing of interest is what happens the Conservatives when they lose.
Elections are exciting when one's own side is looking like winning, or the side one doesn't like is looking like losing. I can see that for Conservative (or SNP) supporters this election would be boring, or at best morbidly fascinating. But for Labour supporters, Reform supporters and - with the usual caveats - Lib Dem supporters this is an exciting election.
My problem - and I do realise this is a genuine character flaw - is that, in spite of the fact that I am pretty sure the next Parliament is going to be very bad for me financially and possess a lot of risks to my livelihood and ability to support my family - in spite of all of that - there is still within me that anarchist disruptor that Heathener was ascribing to Leon.
I have often said I am only a Libertarian because I am too frightened to be an anarchist. I view the old Chinese proverb about 'Living in Interesting times' as a blessing rather than the curse it is intended to be. And this is self destructive and stupid but I do recognise it in myself and it is something I can't completely supress.
So a big bit of me wants to see the Tories get absolutely slaughtered even though it means a Labour Government that will be bad for me and my family.
A bit of me wants to see Reform gain seats just for the laugh and the horror even though I would not myself vote for them in a million years.
I am enjoying all the angst of the French election results because it maks life more interesting even though it could be bad for France and the rest of Europe including the UK.
But all this is the detached observer and I would never actively want to help any of this happen (well except perhaps the destruction of the Tory party but that is for other reasons).
This is why I am so looking forward to Thursday night and hoping it won't all be a boring damp squip.
I think that bit of anarchist exists in all, or most, of us. There was, for example, a bit of me that wanted to see a vote for Brexit, just for the fascination of what would happen. This, despite the fact that I was completely opposed to Brexit on an intellectual level and obviously voted against it.
I guess it comes from the urge for disruption in one's younger years, when you are more likely than your elders to benefit from a change in the status quo and act accordingly. However, as we mature, most of us learn to behave more rationally, to accept these urges for what they are and not allow ourselves to be driven by them. For that way leads ultimately to disaster.
I’ve read so much about the election but so little is talked about the elephant in the room
Rishi Sunak is not white
Some voters will not vote or be v reluctant to vote for a minority PM even if most won’t admit it
It is reflected in the CON polling and the final election result though
It’s taboo to even mention it because it’s not PC to mention race and people in their bubbles like to deny racism exists
Just so we can cut to the chase, what are your view on Gay Rights? And on Ukraine?
Gay rights are an important civil liberty as people should be able to do they want but some people are obsessed with an issue that doesn’t matter to most people
You do bring up a relevent point. I don’t think the UK would vote for a gay man as a leader either . They wouldn’t publicly admit that though !
From what I saw Ukraine weren’t very good in the euros but thats to be expected given the invasion
I genuinely think you are wrong - and pretty much for the reason you state in your first paragraph. The issue doesn't matter to most people. They would simply not think it mattered whether their potential PM was gay or not. At most after the event there might be a bit of self satisfaction from many that the UK was tolerent enough to have voted for a gay leader in spite of the impression some people try to portray that we are intolerent.
I would not vote for Sunak now because he is incompetent and lightweight - but I also did not vote for Johnson for the same reason. I would not vote for Patel or Braverman because they are jackbooted authoritarians - but I also did not vote for May for the same reason.
Some things matter. Others really don't.
I'm not sure that this is the case, much as we all on here might like to think it is. Plenty of people out there and if we look at the 17-20% who say they might vote for Reform I can't believe that some would hold such views.
Oh I am sure there is a small element obviously. We know the racists and homophobes exist. But, for example and not wanting to be nice about Reform, whilst there will be racists and homophobes amongst them, that won't account for most of their support. As such the number of votes that could be mustsred to oppose, for example, a gay PM, would be very small and unlikely to influence the outcome.
I'm not sure I have as much faith as you do in this.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
The LDs/Liberals have always been strongest in those types of seats, going back to the 1970s. Richmond was always their strongest seat in London for instance.
King Edward and Princess Elizabeth are black, but that sort-of becomes inconsequential when it is revealed that Lady Jane Grey marries a horse.
When a story is bonkers (or just light hearted) rather than trying for gritty realism that sort of approach works fine.
Indeed. The production values were blooming high as well.
It made no attempt to be historically accurate (how could it, when the plot involves shape-shifters?), and the narrator says so at the very beginning. I also detect more than a hint of the protestant-catholic Tudor troubles in the series' central conflict.
It got the mood just right. It's unusual for me to say this, but there might have been a little too much sex in it - apparently it is based on a YA book, and I wouldn't show it to my son. Yet. Which is a shame, as it is very funny.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
What is a Gail's?
A Greggs with 4x the price and 4x less quantity. Tastes better though.
Impossible! Greggs is the pinnacle of British street food.
The interesting takeaway from various vox-pops is that people's antagonism towards Johnson is he made promises he had no intention of meeting. Rather than because of Party gate.
My contempt for Johnson is that in some things he was pointing in the right direction, but failed to engage slightly and deliver when he could have done so. And that for me is the problem of the current generation of Tory leaders, plus cynical populism and the things that go with that.
Johnson could have delivered, had he been willing to have a competent chief of staff who could have done everything except the stunts.
Boris needed a Willie. He thought a willy would do, but it was busily engaged elsewhere.
Boris was short term gain, long term pain. As the likes of HY were told, very clearly, well in advance.
That the Tories went for him encapsulates the wider problem with our politics, which offers no incentive to do the right things for the long term when set against a short-term imperative.
The one good thing about Labour crushing the Tories, as we hope for, is that they realise they have ten years plus in power, and can afford to do some of the longer term stuff that is the right thing, but for which they won’t get thanked any time soon.
Without Boris we would probably now have PM Corbyn leading a minority Labour government or at best PM Hunt leading a minority Tory government with Brexit still not having got done and Corbyn looking set to win in the polls next time
Your problem is that too many people will be thinking, ‘how would that be any worse?’
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Do you think that you personally are at risk of starving to death in a famine?
No - but I live in the imperial core. What I do think is that there will be a lot more use of state violence, at home and abroad, to ensure that the "right" people still have access to things like food and water, and that those things will be much more expensive / valued more highly than they are now. It's possible that somewhere like the UK, where our ability to continue the average lifestyle based on locally grown products is very difficult, will have more instability than elsewhere - but it's hard to know exactly.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
The Dinosaurs were never wiped out. They are currently residing in Uranus. The Martians are producing a teleport system for them to be sent to earth and wipe us out. They will be unkillable. Not even weapons of mass destruction that are currently buried in the Iraqi desert will stop them. This will be our destiny.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Why would water scarcity INCREASE in a warmer world, which as we all know gives increased moisture in the atmosphere, and more rain?
Isn't the projection that the bits of the world that don't need more rain will get plenty more (the UK), and vice versa. Hence all the concern about massive migration, particularly from sub-saharan Africa.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
I feel the Lib Dems may get more than 50 seats. Up to 60. Lots of boards in Surrey. Parts of Hampshire. West Sussex and Cheltenham. S. Wiltshire I saw some around Sailsbury area. Not definite on this. What do people on here think?
When I was working a bellwhether constituency in the 80's, we used to reckon there needed to be 40 LibDem posters to every Tory before we were in trouble. It's virtue signalling to put up a LibDem sign. No risk of getting a brick through the window that you have to factor in by putting up a Conservative poster.
Posters is what LibDems do.Try and suggest there is a huge groundswell. But as I reminded someone the other day when we were going round a new development with four LibDem signs, "Aye, but the other 63 haven't publically proclaimed who they are voting for..."
I agree with that post and it and it makes Ed Davey's campaign even smarter than I'd thought. Play to your strengths . Say nothing just show yourself to be a decent bloke with a sense of humour. Absolutely the best idea when facing an opponent considered to be rather unpleasant and humourless
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
We’d all better sort out the mess in Ukraine then.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
I've got 60 years left on this planet and I'd like our politicians to make that as tolerable as possible. It would be great if they took stuff like global food crises seriously.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
I'm confused. How can the presence of a bakery chain in an area indicate its poshness?
I would have thought that a posh area would have a bakery run either by the same family for eight generations, or some young baking wunderkind who'd studied patisserie at the top French school.
Gail's ffs. There are more than a hundred of them now.
And yet it definitely is a thing re Waitrose. Waitrose will build stores with the 'right kind of clientele' - i.e. those that can afford to splash the cash in the supermarket with cornershop prices. Take my area - Westbury, Trowbridge, Frome - no Waitrose. Warminster - Waitrose, and undeniably a more up market town than the others (although Frome is rather bohemian).
Compare and contrast:
Otley: Waitrose Ilkley: Booths, M&S Skipton: M&S Keighley: Sainsbury's, Morrisons & Asda Bingley: Co-op (and a small M&S at the BP garage)
Not a complete list, just the highest-level supermarkets in each town
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
We’d all better sort out the mess in Ukraine then.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
I'm confused. How can the presence of a bakery chain in an area indicate its poshness?
I would have thought that a posh area would have a bakery run either by the same family for eight generations, or some young baking wunderkind who'd studied patisserie at the top French school.
Gail's ffs. There are more than a hundred of them now.
And yet it definitely is a thing re Waitrose. Waitrose will build stores with the 'right kind of clientele' - i.e. those that can afford to splash the cash in the supermarket with cornershop prices. Take my area - Westbury, Trowbridge, Frome - no Waitrose. Warminster - Waitrose, and undeniably a more up market town than the others (although Frome is rather bohemian).
I don't dispute that Waitrose signifies a level of prosperity, aspiration, and perhaps snobbishness in an area, but not posh. There just isn't enough posh to go around to sustain a large chain of anything.
That's why there's only one Harrods.
Gail's is a chain selling the idea of poshness to people with more money than time and interest to find the real bakery gems.
I'm making a start on exploring the bakery options around here, and there's a lot better options than a huge bakery chain.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Do you think that you personally are at risk of starving to death in a famine?
No - but I live in the imperial core. What I do think is that there will be a lot more use of state violence, at home and abroad, to ensure that the "right" people still have access to things like food and water, and that those things will be much more expensive / valued more highly than they are now. It's possible that somewhere like the UK, where our ability to continue the average lifestyle based on locally grown products is very difficult, will have more instability than elsewhere - but it's hard to know exactly.
“Imperial core”? Eh?
The language of the revolutionary left (think Wolfie Smith). I cannot recall the exact figures but the UK went from importing around 60% of its food in 1939 to producing over 90% at home in 1945. We could do so again if needed. Maybe need to go back to more seasonal eating, but the opportunities for vertical growing in factories etc are huge.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Why would water scarcity INCREASE in a warmer world, which as we all know gives increased moisture in the atmosphere, and more rain?
Isn't the projection that the bits of the world that don't need more rain will get plenty more (the UK), and vice versa. Hence all the concern about massive migration, particularly from sub-saharan Africa.
Anywhere that gets it's prevailing weather from an ocean will likely end up wetter - the E&W rainfall for the previous 12 months was almost 1.4 metres - the highest for any 12 month period since records began in the 18th century. For the UK climate change = more rain.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Why would water scarcity INCREASE in a warmer world, which as we all know gives increased moisture in the atmosphere, and more rain?
Isn't the projection that the bits of the world that don't need more rain will get plenty more (the UK), and vice versa. Hence all the concern about massive migration, particularly from sub-saharan Africa.
There are also changes such as a weakening jet steam which, as I understand it, is likely to lead to periods in which the weather becomes less changeable, giving us longer periods of very dry or very wet weather. Hence we could end up with flooding one year and drought the next, rather than a more continuous pattern of rainfall.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
I'm confused. How can the presence of a bakery chain in an area indicate its poshness?
I would have thought that a posh area would have a bakery run either by the same family for eight generations, or some young baking wunderkind who'd studied patisserie at the top French school.
Gail's ffs. There are more than a hundred of them now.
And yet it definitely is a thing re Waitrose. Waitrose will build stores with the 'right kind of clientele' - i.e. those that can afford to splash the cash in the supermarket with cornershop prices. Take my area - Westbury, Trowbridge, Frome - no Waitrose. Warminster - Waitrose, and undeniably a more up market town than the others (although Frome is rather bohemian).
Compare and contrast:
Otley: Waitrose Ilkley: Booths, M&S Skipton: M&S Keighley: Sainsbury's, Morrisons & Asda Bingley: Co-op (and a small M&S at the BP garage)
Not a complete list, just the highest-level supermarkets in each town
For some of those (Skipton) the reason for no Booths is that no site was available at a time Booths as expanding - hence they went to Ripon where a site was available...
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
What is a Gail's?
A Greggs with 4x the price and 4x less quantity. Tastes better though.
Impossible! Greggs is the pinnacle of British street food.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Why would water scarcity INCREASE in a warmer world, which as we all know gives increased moisture in the atmosphere, and more rain?
Isn't the projection that the bits of the world that don't need more rain will get plenty more (the UK), and vice versa. Hence all the concern about massive migration, particularly from sub-saharan Africa.
There was a kerfuffle about this a few years back with Syria. Blaming the Syrian crisis on drought, but it was overblown. We have the ability to mitigate most of this if we are prepared to pay for it.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
It isn't "crying wolf" to look at the data at hand, make a prediction based on your understanding of that data, and have the prediction not happen. It's part and parcel of the scientific method. And on this issue it's not necessarily an argument for everything being hunky dory - sea level rises are happening but because the ice caps are also melting at greater rates then during other periods of higher temperature (because the temperature rises happening now are much faster than over the "natural cycle") it has impacted weather and other aspects of the climate cycle in atypical ways. So, for instance, the quick increase in more extreme weather may mean that deposits are keeping up with erosion in places like the Maldives because erosion is happening faster elsewhere and collecting at the Maldives at a similarly increased rate.
Indiana Jones turns up, gets caught in the crowd and suddenly finds himself face to face with Nigel Farage, holding a book containing top secret details of undercover actors in the pay of Channel 4. Farage takes the book and signs his autograph. Phew, that was close!
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
I've got 60 years left on this planet and I'd like our politicians to make that as tolerable as possible. It would be great if they took stuff like global food crises seriously.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
Tories ? A lot of Reform supporters are ex-Labour, the people Mandelson belittled by saying they had nowhere else to go.
Here it is. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf ..Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclu- sive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presump- tive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts...
Priti Patel (Witham, majority 25,669, 353rd safest Tory seat), has started running Facebook ads in the last couple of days. Very unlikely the seat will change hands.
19th safest Tory seat.
If you were running those ads your biggest problem would be having to mention the name 'Priti Patel'. I don't know the constituency but that name alone would surely be a call to action for every potential voter to hunt for her nearest challenger
LOL if I posted that, you'd be calling me a racist.
Bizarre post
It's ok, politics is not your forte.
Oooh Alan is rattled and lashing out at people.
The idea that Sunak and Starmer are the same is bollocks.
That aside, this is an incredibly exciting election. It’s a seachange and they are rarer’s than hen’s teeth. 1979 and 1997. That, alone, means it is extremely exciting.
Add to that the potential meltdown for the tories, the battle for 2nd place, the apparent surge of Reform, the LibDems in the blue wall, the personalities including Nigel Farage in Clacton and JC in Islington North and it’s incredibly exciting.
But not for you apparently. Now why might that be? Lolz.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Do you think that you personally are at risk of starving to death in a famine?
No - but I live in the imperial core. What I do think is that there will be a lot more use of state violence, at home and abroad, to ensure that the "right" people still have access to things like food and water, and that those things will be much more expensive / valued more highly than they are now. It's possible that somewhere like the UK, where our ability to continue the average lifestyle based on locally grown products is very difficult, will have more instability than elsewhere - but it's hard to know exactly.
So your concern is more that you will see more bad things on your feed and it will make you feel more existential guilt?
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
I've got 60 years left on this planet and I'd like our politicians to make that as tolerable as possible. It would be great if they took stuff like global food crises seriously.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
The LDs/Liberals have always been strongest in those types of seats, going back to the 1970s. Richmond was always their strongest seat in London for instance.
Even more so in the West country though, now less so there and more the posher seats in the SE
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
I have no idea if the Maldive inhabitants genuinely believed that their lands would disappear, or if it was just a cynical way to extract money (president under the water etc).
Priti Patel (Witham, majority 25,669, 353rd safest Tory seat), has started running Facebook ads in the last couple of days. Very unlikely the seat will change hands.
19th safest Tory seat.
If you were running those ads your biggest problem would be having to mention the name 'Priti Patel'. I don't know the constituency but that name alone would surely be a call to action for every potential voter to hunt for her nearest challenger
LOL if I posted that, you'd be calling me a racist.
Bizarre post
It's ok, politics is not your forte.
Oooh Alan is rattled and lashing out at people.
The idea that Sunak and Starmer are the same is bollocks.
That aside, this is an incredibly exciting election. It’s a seachange and they are rarer’s than hen’s teeth. 1979 and 1997. That, alone, means it is extremely exciting.
Add to that the potential meltdown for the tories, the battle for 2nd place, the apparent surge of Reform, the LibDems in the blue wall, the personalities including Nigel Farage in Clacton and JC in Islington North and it’s incredibly exciting.
But not for you apparently. Now why might that be? Lolz.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
The 15-20% who might vote Reform aren't neo-nazis. The number of genuine far right people in the UK is very small, much smaller than say France or Germany. Labelling the voters as such doesn't help you get their vote back.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
Tories ? A lot of Reform supporters are ex-Labour, the people Mandelson belittled by saying they had nowhere else to go.
Until they did.
Yes. Pete. Nostradamus part 2. All roads lead to Mandi.
Here it is. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf ..Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclu- sive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presump- tive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts...
So basically Biden could order the Supreme court and Trump to be killed and there is no comeback..
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
That's a problem when your youth wing and ascendant politicians are seeped in far right / fascistic talking points and memes. But on principle you are right - it's what we're seeing in France now. Macron upheld the economic status quo and legitimised all of Le Pen's talking points on immigration and such, and instead treat the talking points of the left as beyond the pale. Pandering to the far right doesn't placate them, whereas meeting peoples' material needs generally keeps most people happy.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
Tories ? A lot of Reform supporters are ex-Labour, the people Mandelson belittled by saying they had nowhere else to go.
Until they did.
Do try to follow.
I'm not talking about the voters - I'm talking about Tory politicians.
They are the ones who have been pandering to the neo-Nazis and stirring up xenophobia for their own selfish ends.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Why would water scarcity INCREASE in a warmer world, which as we all know gives increased moisture in the atmosphere, and more rain?
Isn't the projection that the bits of the world that don't need more rain will get plenty more (the UK), and vice versa. Hence all the concern about massive migration, particularly from sub-saharan Africa.
There are also changes such as a weakening jet steam which, as I understand it, is likely to lead to periods in which the weather becomes less changeable, giving us longer periods of very dry or very wet weather. Hence we could end up with flooding one year and drought the next, rather than a more continuous pattern of rainfall.
We're not near any dry records, 1976 remains completely unmatched for dryness. That was achieved with a cool atlantic, not something we will see any time soon.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
The 15-20% who might vote Reform aren't neo-nazis. The number of genuine far right people in the UK is very small, much smaller than say France or Germany.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
I've got 60 years left on this planet and I'd like our politicians to make that as tolerable as possible. It would be great if they took stuff like global food crises seriously.
Do we have a global food crisis right now?
Is that the best you can come up with - we don't have a problem now so we won't in the future regardless of what happens to the climate?
Here it is. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf ..Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclu- sive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presump- tive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts...
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE KAGAN and JUSTICE JACKSON join, dissenting. Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal im- munity reshapes the institution of the Presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law. Relying on little more than its own misguided wisdom about the need for “bold and unhesitating action” by the Presi- dent, ante, at 3, 13, the Court gives former President Trump all the immunity he asked for and more. Because our Con- stitution does not shield a former President from answering for criminal and treasonous acts, I dissent...
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
Do you think that you personally are at risk of starving to death in a famine?
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
The LDs/Liberals have always been strongest in those types of seats, going back to the 1970s. Richmond was always their strongest seat in London for instance.
Even more so in the West country though, now less so there and more the posher seats in the SE
their footprint in the NW has also shifted, not that long ago Rochdale and Liverpool Wavertree were LD seats, now they are more Cheadle and Lake District...
Perhaps Boris's detractors on this board could explain the disparity between the two past headers. If Boris was a crap PM who was heading for a Sunak-level GE shellacking, why is there such a desparate need for him to return to the campaign trail from the holiday which Sunak so kindly ensured he could take more of? Surely he would just be cramping Sunak's style and he should stay away and leave the current cabinet to secure the ringing endorsement they so deserve?
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
Tories ? A lot of Reform supporters are ex-Labour, the people Mandelson belittled by saying they had nowhere else to go.
Until they did.
Do try to follow.
I'm not talking about the voters - I'm talking about Tory politicians.
They are the ones who have been pandering to the neo-Nazis and stirring up xenophobia for their own selfish ends.
Well in a strange land where such people exist Im sure youre right but that is not the UK, We dont have Nazis, we have few Nazi politicians and consistently we are one of the least racist countries on the plant.
Here it is. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf ..Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclu- sive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presump- tive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts...
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE KAGAN and JUSTICE JACKSON join, dissenting. Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal im- munity reshapes the institution of the Presidency. It makes a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution and system of Government, that no man is above the law. Relying on little more than its own misguided wisdom about the need for “bold and unhesitating action” by the Presi- dent, ante, at 3, 13, the Court gives former President Trump all the immunity he asked for and more. Because our Con- stitution does not shield a former President from answering for criminal and treasonous acts, I dissent...
...The Court now confronts a question it has never had to answer in the Nation’s history: Whether a former President enjoys immunity from federal criminal prosecution. The majority thinks he should, and so it invents an atextual, ahistorical, and unjustifiable immunity that puts the Pres- ident above the law. The majority makes three moves that, in effect, com- pletely insulate Presidents from criminal liability. First, the majority creates absolute immunity for the President’s exercise of “core constitutional powers.” Ante, at 6. This holding is unnecessary on the facts of the indictment, and the majority’s attempt to apply it to the facts expands the concept of core powers beyond any recognizable bounds. In any event, it is quickly eclipsed by the second move, which is to create expansive immunity for all “official act[s].” Ante, at 14. Whether described as presumptive or absolute, under the majority’s rule, a President’s use of any official power for any purpose, even the most corrupt, is immune from prosecution. That is just as bad as it sounds, and it is baseless. Finally, the majority declares that evidence con- cerning acts for which the President is immune can play no role in any criminal prosecution against him. See ante, at 30–32. That holding, which will prevent the Government from using a President’s official acts to prove knowledge or intent in prosecuting private offenses, is nonsensical...
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
The LDs/Liberals have always been strongest in those types of seats, going back to the 1970s. Richmond was always their strongest seat in London for instance.
Tim Farron's seat has no Waitrose. But of course has a Booths. It may be that, like the two species of crows in Britain, you will get one but not both. My chavish bit of Cumbria has none of these, but no-one will want to know about our ultra local butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, etc.
Here it is. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf ..Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclu- sive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presump- tive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts...
So basically Biden could order the Supreme court and Trump to be killed and there is no comeback..
ROBERTS, C. J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which THOMAS, ALITO, GORSUCH, and KAVANAUGH, JJ., joined in full, and in which BARRETT, J., joined except as to Part III–C. THOMAS, J., filed a concurring opinion. BARRETT, J., filed an opinion concurring in part. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which KAGAN and JACKSON, JJ., joined. JACKSON, J., filed a dissenting opinion
5-3 as I almost predicted, only bit I got wrong was that Alito didn't join Thomas in his presumably more Trumpite than the remainder opinion. Oh and looking at it Barrett presumably more moderate.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
The LDs/Liberals have always been strongest in those types of seats, going back to the 1970s. Richmond was always their strongest seat in London for instance.
Even more so in the West country though, now less so there and more the posher seats in the SE
their footprint in the NW has also shifted, not that long ago Rochdale and Liverpool Wavertree were LD seats, now they are more Cheadle and Lake District...
"Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts," the ruling says.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
I'm confused. How can the presence of a bakery chain in an area indicate its poshness?
I would have thought that a posh area would have a bakery run either by the same family for eight generations, or some young baking wunderkind who'd studied patisserie at the top French school.
Gail's ffs. There are more than a hundred of them now.
And yet it definitely is a thing re Waitrose. Waitrose will build stores with the 'right kind of clientele' - i.e. those that can afford to splash the cash in the supermarket with cornershop prices. Take my area - Westbury, Trowbridge, Frome - no Waitrose. Warminster - Waitrose, and undeniably a more up market town than the others (although Frome is rather bohemian).
I don't dispute that Waitrose signifies a level of prosperity, aspiration, and perhaps snobbishness in an area, but not posh. There just isn't enough posh to go around to sustain a large chain of anything.
That's why there's only one Harrods.
I remember seeing the one in Buenos Aires. Apparently it closed in 1998.
Here it is. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf ..Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclu- sive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presump- tive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts...
So basically Biden could order the Supreme court and Trump to be killed and there is no comeback..
Yes.
It is an abominable decision, which basically dares Presidents to abuse their powers for fear of their opponents doing so in turn.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
The 15-20% who might vote Reform aren't neo-nazis. The number of genuine far right people in the UK is very small, much smaller than say France or Germany. Labelling the voters as such doesn't help you get their vote back.
We're talking about the Reform rallies. It's the politicians who are neo-Nazis.
Their support would have been minimal if the Tories hadn't pandered to them, for their own self-serving reasons.
So, basically an open acknowledgement that financial institutions are being used as economic paramilitaries by the establishment to depose governments they don't like.
As happened here a couple of years back
"How markets are ready to ‘do the dirty job’ of fighting Le Pen Bond traders are already reacting to the risk of unfettered spending under National Rally."
I'm 33 - my pension fund is never going to be realised because in 40 years time either no one will be allowed to retire, or the climate is going to be in such a state that global capitalism will be unable to function as it currently does that the "value" of my pension won't really matter...
Do you genuinely believe that? What is it about potential climate change that you think will end global capitalism? And 'no-one will be allowed to retire"? Really? If you are so fearful for the future why pay into a pension at all?
Most people I know my age, even those not on the left, believe some version of this.
And I didn't say "end global capitalism" I said "unable to function as it currently does". And that's because resource scarcity is going to get much worse over the next few decades.
Which resources in particular are you worried about?
Food scarcity is going to increase in the next few decades; we are already seeing drought and flooding hit wheat production globally, and that looks set to get worse. Water scarcity will increase globally as the planet gets warmer. If the Gulf Stream weakens enough, our farming specifically will go haywire
No it won't. Food production is going to continue going from strength to strength.
Any diminution of food production will be when dimwitted governments decide to implement policies such as the Environmental Stewardship Scheme which takes arable or land out of production. But there is always Tescos other countries.
You can't be certain about any of this. Even a relatively small and brief crisis could have global repercussions. If Vietnam's rice bowl continues to have droughts and salination issues...
The big unknown is new diseases turning up. Bird flu is still bubbling away, under the radar.
Yep true and if a meteor hits us we will all be wiped out but in the absence of many of your "ifs" then all will be well and in any case 148 was talking about BAU leading to this catastrophe, not some attack of highly trained killer bees.
BAU is increasing chance of all these things happening as the climate changes.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
I've got 60 years left on this planet and I'd like our politicians to make that as tolerable as possible. It would be great if they took stuff like global food crises seriously.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
Tories ? A lot of Reform supporters are ex-Labour, the people Mandelson belittled by saying they had nowhere else to go.
Until they did.
Do try to follow.
I'm not talking about the voters - I'm talking about Tory politicians.
They are the ones who have been pandering to the neo-Nazis and stirring up xenophobia for their own selfish ends.
I think the argument that everyone would love immigrants were it not for Tory politicians is a very odd one, except in the narrow sense that the anger about immigration is to a large extent because under this government so much immigration has happened.
Priti Patel (Witham, majority 25,669, 353rd safest Tory seat), has started running Facebook ads in the last couple of days. Very unlikely the seat will change hands.
19th safest Tory seat.
If you were running those ads your biggest problem would be having to mention the name 'Priti Patel'. I don't know the constituency but that name alone would surely be a call to action for every potential voter to hunt for her nearest challenger
LOL if I posted that, you'd be calling me a racist.
??? So we can't attack someone's politics now if they aren't white? Since when did the right go woke?
I don't care what colour someone's skin is they get treated the same by me.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
The LDs/Liberals have always been strongest in those types of seats, going back to the 1970s. Richmond was always their strongest seat in London for instance.
Tim Farron's seat has no Waitrose. But of course has a Booths. It may be that, like the two species of crows in Britain, you will get one but not both. My chavish bit of Cumbria has none of these, but no-one will want to know about our ultra local butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, etc.
Priti Patel (Witham, majority 25,669, 353rd safest Tory seat), has started running Facebook ads in the last couple of days. Very unlikely the seat will change hands.
19th safest Tory seat.
If you were running those ads your biggest problem would be having to mention the name 'Priti Patel'. I don't know the constituency but that name alone would surely be a call to action for every potential voter to hunt for her nearest challenger
LOL if I posted that, you'd be calling me a racist.
??? So we can't attack someone's politics now if they aren't white? Since when did the right go woke?
I don't care what colour someone's skin is they get treated the same by me.
Here it is. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf ..Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclu- sive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presump- tive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts...
So basically Biden could order the Supreme court and Trump to be killed and there is no comeback..
Yes.
It is an abominable decision, which basically dares Presidents to abuse their powers for fear of their opponents doing so in turn.
Only if an official act within the powers of the Presidency, the SC affirmed there is no immunity for private, unofficial acts outside the constitutional powers of the Presidency. So lots of room for lawyers to debate which of Trump's acts were official and which unofficial
"Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts," the ruling says.
"Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts," the ruling says.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
Tories ? A lot of Reform supporters are ex-Labour, the people Mandelson belittled by saying they had nowhere else to go.
Until they did.
Do try to follow.
I'm not talking about the voters - I'm talking about Tory politicians.
They are the ones who have been pandering to the neo-Nazis and stirring up xenophobia for their own selfish ends.
Well in a strange land where such people exist Im sure youre right but that is not the UK, We dont have Nazis, we have few Nazi politicians and consistently we are one of the least racist countries on the plant.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
The 15-20% who might vote Reform aren't neo-nazis. The number of genuine far right people in the UK is very small, much smaller than say France or Germany. Labelling the voters as such doesn't help you get their vote back.
I can't see how they are remotely reminiscent of the Nuremburg rallies in any way except that they feature a speaker, speaking to lots of people. They are therefore reminiscent of 'rallies'. Suggesting otherwise sounds like extremely sour grapes from a party that couldn't fill a bus stop.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
The LDs/Liberals have always been strongest in those types of seats, going back to the 1970s. Richmond was always their strongest seat in London for instance.
Even more so in the West country though, now less so there and more the posher seats in the SE
their footprint in the NW has also shifted, not that long ago Rochdale and Liverpool Wavertree were LD seats, now they are more Cheadle and Lake District...
"Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no immunity for unofficial acts," the ruling says.
My sense is the Lib Dems are becoming the party of the well-to-do English upper middle classes in the posh areas.
They don't register very much anywhere else.
Yes, generally the higher the LD voteshare in general and local elections now, the more likely the area is to have a Waitrose, a Gail's and a well above average house price
The LDs/Liberals have always been strongest in those types of seats, going back to the 1970s. Richmond was always their strongest seat in London for instance.
Tim Farron's seat has no Waitrose. But of course has a Booths. It may be that, like the two species of crows in Britain, you will get one but not both. My chavish bit of Cumbria has none of these, but no-one will want to know about our ultra local butchers, bakers, candlestick makers, etc.
You can't get both - because if people were given a choice between Booths and Waitrose the Waitrose would be closing within a month.
It is such a dumb approach to combatting Farage. Stick to pointing out he doesn't actually have any workable policies for dealing with real concerns people have than labelling a load of voters Nazi sympathisers.
On the contrary, the Tories should have been clear all along that these people were neo-Nazis, rather than pandering to them in the hope of gaining a few miserable votes.
The 15-20% who might vote Reform aren't neo-nazis. The number of genuine far right people in the UK is very small, much smaller than say France or Germany. Labelling the voters as such doesn't help you get their vote back.
The problem is, as Naomi Shulman wrote, "nice people make the best Nazis":
“Nice people made the best Nazis. My mom grew up next to them. They got along, refused to make waves, looked the other way when things got ugly and focused on happier things than “politics.” They were lovely people who turned their heads as their neighbours were dragged away. You know who weren’t nice people? Resisters.”
I can never say with 100% certainty that anyone who supports Reform or Farage or whichever party it is is, in their heart, a Neo-Nazi or a fascist. But the thing is if they would sit back and watch as a "strong man" gets swept into power and "sorts everything out" there's no real difference between them and ideological Nazis. They may have been duped, they may have been bamboozled, they may have believed lies or promises. But they would have ushered the fascists into power just as much as any tatted bonehead.
Comments
*Delete as appropriate.
Edit.. oh and the self awareness bit.
You might find agriculture keeps up and global food supply is secure throughout. Even if that is the case, there will be enormous localised disruption..
I guess it comes from the urge for disruption in one's younger years, when you are more likely than your elders to benefit from a change in the status quo and act accordingly. However, as we mature, most of us learn to behave more rationally, to accept these urges for what they are and not allow ourselves to be driven by them. For that way leads ultimately to disaster.
It made no attempt to be historically accurate (how could it, when the plot involves shape-shifters?), and the narrator says so at the very beginning. I also detect more than a hint of the protestant-catholic Tudor troubles in the series' central conflict.
It got the mood just right. It's unusual for me to say this, but there might have been a little too much sex in it - apparently it is based on a YA book, and I wouldn't show it to my son. Yet. Which is a shame, as it is very funny.
Tory Candidate In Clacton Says Reform Rallies Are "Reminiscent" Of "Nuremberg" Rallies
https://x.com/elliottengage/status/1807780866107609564
Asking for a friend - how intimately is lady Jane's marriage portrayed?
But we have had a lot of wolf crying.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/06/26/climate/maldives-islands-climate-change.html
It’s just a jump to the left…
I've got 60 years left on this planet and I'd like our politicians to make that as tolerable as possible. It would be great if they took stuff like global food crises seriously.
Otley: Waitrose
Ilkley: Booths, M&S
Skipton: M&S
Keighley: Sainsbury's, Morrisons & Asda
Bingley: Co-op (and a small M&S at the BP garage)
Not a complete list, just the highest-level supermarkets in each town
Not sure if that tells you much. Other than in 2019, they skewed heavily to the Conservatives.
That's why there's only one Harrods.
Gail's is a chain selling the idea of poshness to people with more money than time and interest to find the real bakery gems.
I'm making a start on exploring the bakery options around here, and there's a lot better options than a huge bakery chain.
Or we could just eat the poor.
For the UK climate change = more rain.
Does Hitler get a big cheer?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4HWm8DpwOs
Until they did.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
..Under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature
of Presidential power entitles a former President to absolute immunity
from criminal prosecution for actions within his conclusive and preclu-
sive constitutional authority. And he is entitled to at least presump-
tive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. There is no
immunity for unofficial acts...
The idea that Sunak and Starmer are the same is bollocks.
That aside, this is an incredibly exciting election. It’s a seachange and they are rarer’s than hen’s teeth. 1979 and 1997. That, alone, means it is extremely exciting.
Add to that the potential meltdown for the tories, the battle for 2nd place, the apparent surge of Reform, the LibDems in the blue wall, the personalities including Nigel Farage in Clacton and JC in Islington North and it’s incredibly exciting.
But not for you apparently. Now why might that be? Lolz.
Yawn
https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-immunity-supreme-court-decision-07-01-24/index.html
I'm not talking about the voters - I'm talking about Tory politicians.
They are the ones who have been pandering to the neo-Nazis and stirring up xenophobia for their own selfish ends.
Different age range for Nige, and unclear as to whether the fainting and knicker wetting is just all in a day's work for his groupies.
JUSTICE JACKSON join, dissenting.
Today’s decision to grant former Presidents criminal im-
munity reshapes the institution of the Presidency. It makes
a mockery of the principle, foundational to our Constitution
and system of Government, that no man is above the law.
Relying on little more than its own misguided wisdom about
the need for “bold and unhesitating action” by the Presi-
dent, ante, at 3, 13, the Court gives former President Trump
all the immunity he asked for and more. Because our Con-
stitution does not shield a former President from answering
for criminal and treasonous acts, I dissent...
Thinks
Coruscant????
answer in the Nation’s history: Whether a former President
enjoys immunity from federal criminal prosecution. The
majority thinks he should, and so it invents an atextual,
ahistorical, and unjustifiable immunity that puts the Pres-
ident above the law.
The majority makes three moves that, in effect, com-
pletely insulate Presidents from criminal liability. First,
the majority creates absolute immunity for the President’s
exercise of “core constitutional powers.” Ante, at 6. This
holding is unnecessary on the facts of the indictment, and
the majority’s attempt to apply it to the facts expands the
concept of core powers beyond any recognizable bounds. In
any event, it is quickly eclipsed by the second move, which
is to create expansive immunity for all “official act[s].”
Ante, at 14. Whether described as presumptive or absolute,
under the majority’s rule, a President’s use of any official
power for any purpose, even the most corrupt, is immune
from prosecution. That is just as bad as it sounds, and it is
baseless. Finally, the majority declares that evidence con-
cerning acts for which the President is immune can play no
role in any criminal prosecution against him. See ante, at
30–32. That holding, which will prevent the Government
from using a President’s official acts to prove knowledge or
intent in prosecuting private offenses, is nonsensical...
ALITO, GORSUCH, and KAVANAUGH, JJ., joined in full, and in which BARRETT, J., joined except as to Part III–C. THOMAS, J., filed a concurring
opinion. BARRETT, J., filed an opinion concurring in part. SOTOMAYOR,
J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which KAGAN and JACKSON, JJ., joined.
JACKSON, J., filed a dissenting opinion
5-3 as I almost predicted, only bit I got wrong was that Alito didn't join Thomas in his presumably more Trumpite than the remainder opinion. Oh and looking at it Barrett presumably more moderate.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cw0y5228v1yt
It is an abominable decision, which basically dares Presidents to abuse their powers for fear of their opponents doing so in turn.
Funnily enough I think I’ve got an anarchist streak too, certainly a recalcitrant one when it comes to State interference of civil liberties.
c.f. @Leon
Their support would have been minimal if the Tories hadn't pandered to them, for their own self-serving reasons.
Definitely a crisis.
I don't care what colour someone's skin is they get treated the same by me.
or is that "I miss having a Waitrose near me"...
Pedants, please help...
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/prediction_main.html
Trump was allowed to forment insurrection because he thought that there had been a threat to the constitution?
“Nice people made the best Nazis. My mom grew up next to them. They got along, refused to make waves, looked the other way when things got ugly and focused on happier things than “politics.” They were lovely people who turned their heads as their neighbours were dragged away. You know who weren’t nice people? Resisters.”
I can never say with 100% certainty that anyone who supports Reform or Farage or whichever party it is is, in their heart, a Neo-Nazi or a fascist. But the thing is if they would sit back and watch as a "strong man" gets swept into power and "sorts everything out" there's no real difference between them and ideological Nazis. They may have been duped, they may have been bamboozled, they may have believed lies or promises. But they would have ushered the fascists into power just as much as any tatted bonehead.
Bank on it.