Why on earth have Paris made the main Olympic swimming pool temporary? Their permanent aquatics centre is only being used for the artistic swimming, water polo and diving events.
Because they can sell more tickets in the temporary venue, it’s the largest indoor arena in Europe and recently hosted The Rolling Stones and Taylor Swift. They get 15,000 people in the swimming pool configuration.
This video explains why. It comes down to cost and risk. You reduce the cost and even more so the risk if you reuse existing facilities. Paris will cost about half the London games, which was a somewhat better managed Olympics than most of the recent ones.
The amount of legacy they will get from it is not massively different from other cities. Olympics have always been justified for host cities on the legacy it generates but it has nearly always been a nonsense. The $10 billion or whatever buys you a three week party the world is invited to.
Thanks for the replies from yourself and @Sandpit . Looks like my criticism was wrong, especially as the permanent aquatics centre does have a new 50-metre pool.
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
Though Labour only got 34% of the vote, there are 150 Labour MPs with solid majorities of over 10K (and 26 LibDem MPs with majorities of over 10K )
The Tories have only 5 MPs with over 10K majorities. The 121 Tory MPs are spread very thinly. Toast?
Next time the protest vote will be against an incumbent Labour government not the Tories
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
Though Labour only got 34% of the vote, there are 150 Labour MPs with solid majorities of over 10K (and 26 LibDem MPs with majorities of over 10K )
The Tories have only 5 MPs with over 10K majorities. The 121 Tory MPs are spread very thinly. Toast?
Next time the protest vote will be against an incumbent Labour government not the Tories
Or against both, if the LDs play their cards right.....
Unless the LDs go full Orange Book fiscal conservatism plus rejoin the EU (ie back to Cleggism) they will offer an echo of Starmer not an alternative to his government
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
I remember in May 1997 it really did feel like the dawn of a new era and real change afoot.
This time, it feels much like the deckchairs on the Titanic being reshuffled. Same old Office of Budget Responsibility, same old Supreme Court enforcing ECHR nosturms, same old Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee setting interest rates etc etc.
The Ministers and MPs are reduced to councillors trying to oversee a permanent self governing standing bureaucracy that they have little control of and which has a vested interest in more regulation and therefore more renumerative work for them and their associates.
Quite, but Labour are actively and energetically supporting that asphyxiation of democracy. They want more power to be handed to the OBR for example.
Not surprising, given that Starmer headed one quango and Reeves worked at another.
They're also actively and energetically supporting the asphyxiation of our economy. Their first big action will be to shovel more money at their public sector union friends, and their second will be to soak the already overtaxed enterprising and productive for it.
As has been completely predictable throughout, no matter how much they tried to hide it or lied.
Their poll rating will collapse in 12-18 months as everyone realises Labour hasn’t got a clue what to do except tax more, and allow in more migrants and asylum seekers
If the migrants are working in the health, care and hospitality sectors, only the racists will still be complaining. If the asylum seekers are processed efficiently, they will no longer be a major issue.
As has been shown in Holland and Denmark, non western migrants are a net drain on an economy
As for the asylum seekers, you think “efficient processing” will deter others from coming? lol. No
“Labour admits Britain is locked in a small-boat crisis in the Channel just days after scrapping Tories' Rwanda deportation scheme - as 1,100 migrants land in UK since Keir Starmer took power.”
I know you have difficulty with basic reading comprehension but what part of Fairliered's "If the migrants are working in the health, care and hospitality sectors" did you have problems understanding?
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
I remember in May 1997 it really did feel like the dawn of a new era and real change afoot.
This time, it feels much like the deckchairs on the Titanic being reshuffled. Same old Office of Budget Responsibility, same old Supreme Court enforcing ECHR nosturms, same old Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee setting interest rates etc etc.
The Ministers and MPs are reduced to councillors trying to oversee a permanent self governing standing bureaucracy that they have little control of and which has a vested interest in more regulation and therefore more renumerative work for them and their associates.
Quite, but Labour are actively and energetically supporting that asphyxiation of democracy. They want more power to be handed to the OBR for example.
Risible. Attempting a coup, as Trump did, that’s asphyxiating democracy. Saying you’ll put things through the OBR isn’t.
Having a putsch is one way to end democracy - gradually legislating it out of existence is another.
This nonsense really is the last refuge of the defeated Tory Right. If you had any genuine concern about democracy, you'd be looking at America, where the candidate of the Right is openly telling people that if he wins there won't be any need to vote next time!
As Trump is constitutionally barred from a third term as far as he is concerned there isn't, he just needs to get his delayed second term and then he can finish the job of sorting America out
Your best attempt at making sense of that Trump nonsense is "Après moi, le déluge"?
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Ummm a few have PhDs. I certainly wouldn't criticise many of my own school teachers but the idea that a large number would walk into academic research positions? No. Some may go to the state sector but I think this is pretty small compensation for the costs of the policy in having to educate more pupils in state schools. However one thing that helps is the declining number of children. That will reduce the cost of education and help stop overcrowding.
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
Though Labour only got 34% of the vote, there are 150 Labour MPs with solid majorities of over 10K (and 26 LibDem MPs with majorities of over 10K )
The Tories have only 5 MPs with over 10K majorities. The 121 Tory MPs are spread very thinly. Toast?
If the Tories can ally with Reform, that 34% is VERY beatable
And as Labour are only going to impoverish and immiserate the country, the chances of a remarkable Labour defeat in 2028 are high
As previously noted "a wish is not a claim upon reality". The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever. The "unacceptable versus the insipid" leadership race shows no sign of turning the Tories around. As for Farage, disappearing up Trumps fundament while trying to crap on Ukraine is why he will never achieve office. The Doughty St tendency has led the right down a path of infantile populism coloured with aggression that makes Patel a stateswoman and Jenrick a moderate. Face up to it- you're finished as a coherent political force under any of these leaders. All you have left is coarse, populist invective a la Trump, and that is a position of failure. Trying to fight old battles just reminds us how much we loathe these people. You need to press a reset button that isn't Farage or Patel or Jenrick. Won't happen this time though.
Isn’t this statement “ The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever.” showing you doing exactly what you are criticising others for in the bit in bold?
You despise the Tories, that’s absolutely fine, but your wish for them to be done or finished is likely a wish. Many people thought Labour were done or finished after 2019, black Swans and a change in leadership turned things around in one term, there is no reason that this also cannot happen with the Tories so your hubris, confidence and joy at the demise of the Tories might just be clouding your judgement.
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
Though Labour only got 34% of the vote, there are 150 Labour MPs with solid majorities of over 10K (and 26 LibDem MPs with majorities of over 10K )
The Tories have only 5 MPs with over 10K majorities. The 121 Tory MPs are spread very thinly. Toast?
If the Tories can ally with Reform, that 34% is VERY beatable
And as Labour are only going to impoverish and immiserate the country, the chances of a remarkable Labour defeat in 2028 are high
As previously noted "a wish is not a claim upon reality". The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever.
Bit of a lack of self-awareness gem, this sentence combo.
Bugger, you posted what I was getting at in a much pithier and more effective way.
Why on earth have Paris made the main Olympic swimming pool temporary? Their permanent aquatics centre is only being used for the artistic swimming, water polo and diving events.
Because they can sell more tickets in the temporary venue, it’s the largest indoor arena in Europe and recently hosted The Rolling Stones and Taylor Swift. They get 15,000 people in the swimming pool configuration.
This video explains why. It comes down to cost and risk. You reduce the cost and even more so the risk if you reuse existing facilities. Paris will cost about half the London games, which was a somewhat better managed Olympics than most of the recent ones.
The amount of legacy they will get from it is not massively different from other cities. Olympics have always been justified for host cities on the legacy it generates but it has nearly always been a nonsense. The $10 billion or whatever buys you a three week party the world is invited to.
Thanks for the replies from yourself and @Sandpit . Looks like my criticism was wrong, especially as the permanent aquatics centre does have a new 50-metre pool.
Presumably the new aquatics centre in St Denis being used for less popular Olympic sports like water polo will provide sufficient seating for normal competitive events such as European swimming championships after the Olympics are over
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Speaking to Nurses/Docs in a private hospital /GP gets you the same with knobs on.
The impression I get is that the NHS is so riddled with petty procedure and poor petty management that it is the most miserable place to work with less scope to use your own judgement than a man turning a wheel all day in a Victorian Mill.
Cobblers. From my experience, admittedly 25 years or so ago.
This is more recent, courtesy of an op under work health insurance and parent self funding an op.
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Ummm a few have PhDs. I certainly wouldn't criticise many of my own school teachers but the idea that a large number would walk into academic research positions? No. Some may go to the state sector but I think this is pretty small compensation for the costs of the policy in having to educate more pupils in state schools. However one thing that helps is the declining number of children. That will reduce the cost of education and help stop overcrowding.
If they did go into the state sector it would be mostly grammar schools any ex teachers of closed small private schools went to and the odd outstanding rated free school or academy or primary school or else bigger elite private schools which remained open even with VAT on school fees.
They certainly won't be going to the average comp down the road
The Tellygraf is reporting that the French train sabotage might have been done by far left radicals and not Putin. Seems unlikely. Tho given the pro-Putin sentiments of some on the French left, maybe they worked TOGETHER
Russia stopped being far left in 1991. If it was Le Pen'ite far right types then maybe.
I observed yesterday that there was a lot of confirmation bias in yesterdays speculation here as to who did it.
But there’s a strand of pro Putin love on the far left, in France. That is le point
Possibly, although I doubt that left wing rail workers are much into that rabbit hole.
And this needed some seriously knowledgable insiders to know where to set fire to the cable trough to cause line shutting chaos rather than delays.
It really does not require much knowledge. In fact, I'd argue the most knowledge required is where you can access the railway, and how to make an incendiary device that would create a hot enough fire in an easily-transportable manner. Cables, and particularly fibre optics, can be time-consuming to cut and splice. As for where; somewhere on a fast part of the network, preferably with points and/or signals. But even cabling damage on a a stretch of plain line would be a PITA for the network.
.
You do realise that railway systems, particularly newer ones like the LGVs have what is known as diversity and redundancy.
This means that you might only achieve a lot of flashing lights in a control centre and rerouting of circuits via diverse cables that have not gone up in smoke, or degraded mode operation where backup systems enable trains to pass at reduced speed and less frequently, possibly with local manual intervention.
To cause the sort of chaos (multiple entire routes hundreds of miles long closed for days) that we have seen; you need to know, in detail, the few single points of failure that will maximise impact.
SNCF will now be urgently working on eliminating or mitigating those (and feeling annoyed with themselves that they got caught out to the extent they did on such modern infrastructure).
Yes... I'm well aware, thanks.
AIUI the degraded mode systems do not allow anywhere near the same speeds, and hence capacity. More so if linesmen have to be on the track fixing the blooming thing.
"To cause the sort of chaos (multiple entire routes hundreds of miles long closed for days) that we have seen; you need to know, in detail, the few single points of failure that will maximise impact."
I disagree. It is far easier than you claim, especially with systems that rely on in-cab signalling, such as the TGV.
Depends how well they are designed and what diversity and redundancy is built in. The better designs even allow main control centre to be destroyed and the network run from a backup.
Eliminating lineside signals and all their local cabling makes things much easier, especially if radio rather than inductive wires down the middle of the track is used.
Value engineering imposed by the bean counters often destroys most of the benefits to save 10% of the costs though.
The few videos I've seen of the disruption shows people fixing and splicing cables in troughing, not even working at S&T cabinets.
I wonder if the 'attack' was as simple as pouting petrol into the troughing, then lighting it.
Yes, something like that seems to have been the case. In which case it should have had nothing other than localised impact on a modern high speed railway. Those fibre cables should have had full diversity so that if you destroy them, all that happens is that the comms equipment reroutes the circuits they carry through another route. Easy enough to do. For example you just have one route up the LGV and diverse route via the Classic line. Gets expensive with branches where you have to dig up streets between their termini to link them together, but not the case here. The SNCF Network there is enough of a grid that the comms transmission backbone carrying everything should have multiple diverse routes.
I suspect there are going to be some high up S&T engineers in SNCF attending meetings sans coffee and biscuits come Monday.
By 'diversity' I assume you mean 'redundancy' ? That can lead to all sorts of other issues, especially where fail-safe is the priority (as it is on the railways).
No not the same thing.
You have a triangle of railways between A, B and C. You run a fibre backbone around the whole network.
If you cut the fibre a mile and a half from A on the line between A and B then the comms transmission bearer reroutes evertyhing to run via C, including the equipment box two miles from A which instead of routing via a mile of the A to B fibre routes from A to C to B then most of the way back to the equipment box near A.
You have to ensure that every bit of the fibre route from A to B is physically diverse from the Fibre Routes from A to C or from C to B.
As I once said on an equalities module in a management course to general laughter and a stunned lecturer who had asked what "Diversity" mean't.
"Diversity means Effective Segregation."
Redundancy would be having two equipment boxes two miles down the track from A.
Urrrm, no. Redundancy *can* mean that; it can also mean a whole host of other things as well.
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Ummm a few have PhDs. I certainly wouldn't criticise many of my own school teachers but the idea that a large number would walk into academic research positions? No. Some may go to the state sector but I think this is pretty small compensation for the costs of the policy in having to educate more pupils in state schools. However one thing that helps is the declining number of children. That will reduce the cost of education and help stop overcrowding.
If they did go into the state sector it would be mostly grammar schools any ex teachers of closed small private schools went to and the odd outstanding rated free school or academy or primary school or else bigger elite private schools which remained open even with VAT on school fees.
They certainly won't be going to the average comp down the road
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
I remember in May 1997 it really did feel like the dawn of a new era and real change afoot.
This time, it feels much like the deckchairs on the Titanic being reshuffled. Same old Office of Budget Responsibility, same old Supreme Court enforcing ECHR nosturms, same old Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee setting interest rates etc etc.
The Ministers and MPs are reduced to councillors trying to oversee a permanent self governing standing bureaucracy that they have little control of and which has a vested interest in more regulation and therefore more renumerative work for them and their associates.
Quite, but Labour are actively and energetically supporting that asphyxiation of democracy. They want more power to be handed to the OBR for example.
Risible. Attempting a coup, as Trump did, that’s asphyxiating democracy. Saying you’ll put things through the OBR isn’t.
Having a putsch is one way to end democracy - gradually legislating it out of existence is another.
This nonsense really is the last refuge of the defeated Tory Right. If you had any genuine concern about democracy, you'd be looking at America, where the candidate of the Right is openly telling people that if he wins there won't be any need to vote next time!
As Trump is constitutionally barred from a third term as far as he is concerned there isn't, he just needs to get his delayed second term and then he can finish the job of sorting America out
Why on earth have Paris made the main Olympic swimming pool temporary? Their permanent aquatics centre is only being used for the artistic swimming, water polo and diving events.
Because they can sell more tickets in the temporary venue, it’s the largest indoor arena in Europe and recently hosted The Rolling Stones and Taylor Swift. They get 15,000 people in the swimming pool configuration.
This video explains why. It comes down to cost and risk. You reduce the cost and even more so the risk if you reuse existing facilities. Paris will cost about half the London games, which was a somewhat better managed Olympics than most of the recent ones.
The amount of legacy they will get from it is not massively different from other cities. Olympics have always been justified for host cities on the legacy it generates but it has nearly always been a nonsense. The $10 billion or whatever buys you a three week party the world is invited to.
Thanks for the replies from yourself and @Sandpit . Looks like my criticism was wrong, especially as the permanent aquatics centre does have a new 50-metre pool.
Presumably the new aquatics centre in St Denis being used for less popular Olympic sports like water polo will provide sufficient seating for normal competitive events such as European swimming championships after the Olympics are over
Given that it’s in Saint Denis it will probably become a venue for international fent dealing and pan-European people smuggling
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
Though Labour only got 34% of the vote, there are 150 Labour MPs with solid majorities of over 10K (and 26 LibDem MPs with majorities of over 10K )
The Tories have only 5 MPs with over 10K majorities. The 121 Tory MPs are spread very thinly. Toast?
If the Tories can ally with Reform, that 34% is VERY beatable
And as Labour are only going to impoverish and immiserate the country, the chances of a remarkable Labour defeat in 2028 are high
As previously noted "a wish is not a claim upon reality". The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever. The "unacceptable versus the insipid" leadership race shows no sign of turning the Tories around. As for Farage, disappearing up Trumps fundament while trying to crap on Ukraine is why he will never achieve office. The Doughty St tendency has led the right down a path of infantile populism coloured with aggression that makes Patel a stateswoman and Jenrick a moderate. Face up to it- you're finished as a coherent political force under any of these leaders. All you have left is coarse, populist invective a la Trump, and that is a position of failure. Trying to fight old battles just reminds us how much we loathe these people. You need to press a reset button that isn't Farage or Patel or Jenrick. Won't happen this time though.
Isn’t this statement “ The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever.” showing you doing exactly what you are criticising others for in the bit in bold?
You despise the Tories, that’s absolutely fine, but your wish for them to be done or finished is likely a wish. Many people thought Labour were done or finished after 2019, black Swans and a change in leadership turned things around in one term, there is no reason that this also cannot happen with the Tories so your hubris, confidence and joy at the demise of the Tories might just be clouding your judgement.
Ok Tories, you seriously think they will win the next General Election? Really? Really, hand on heart? I appreciate Labour are not loved, and neither is Reform or the Lib Dems for that matter, but the negatives on the Tories are just way to high for a quick recovery It is delusional to think that all it needs is to "keep buggering on". Unless you press the reset button, there is no historical precedent for a Tory recovery to power in a single Parliament- that's a statement of fact, not of opinion or a wish. You're right, I do think the Tories deserve oblivion, but I've been beaten too many times to have anything other than an ultra realist view of the shiftless sods. So feel free to cheer on the empty shell of dead right wing populism if you like, but the world is moving on. The self indulgent wank of the last government was a total disgrace and a gimmicky, childish, abject failure. Keep playing that game and you will lose, and rightly so. So feel free to keep listening to "non experts", to columnists or self appointed pundits. Much good it will do you.
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Ummm a few have PhDs. I certainly wouldn't criticise many of my own school teachers but the idea that a large number would walk into academic research positions? No. Some may go to the state sector but I think this is pretty small compensation for the costs of the policy in having to educate more pupils in state schools. However one thing that helps is the declining number of children. That will reduce the cost of education and help stop overcrowding.
If they did go into the state sector it would be mostly grammar schools any ex teachers of closed small private schools went to and the odd outstanding rated free school or academy or primary school or else bigger elite private schools which remained open even with VAT on school fees.
They certainly won't be going to the average comp down the road
Do you actually know any really good teachers?
What makes a good teacher in your average comp, namely being able to control a class mainly for most classes below A Level, is not the same as what makes a good teacher in your average public or grammar school, which is often high enough subject knowledge to prepare most pupils for entrance to Oxbridge and Russell group universities ultimately. Or excellence in music and sport and coaching to that standard
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
On the whole you do a PhD with the primary aim of being an "academic researcher', for which it's the obvious preparation, not of being a teacher, to which it's almost entirely irrelevant. So it's unlikely that many of the PhDs who have ex hypothesi taken up teaching as a fallback are going to be reingested into academia.
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
Though Labour only got 34% of the vote, there are 150 Labour MPs with solid majorities of over 10K (and 26 LibDem MPs with majorities of over 10K )
The Tories have only 5 MPs with over 10K majorities. The 121 Tory MPs are spread very thinly. Toast?
If the Tories can ally with Reform, that 34% is VERY beatable
And as Labour are only going to impoverish and immiserate the country, the chances of a remarkable Labour defeat in 2028 are high
As previously noted "a wish is not a claim upon reality". The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever. The "unacceptable versus the insipid" leadership race shows no sign of turning the Tories around. As for Farage, disappearing up Trumps fundament while trying to crap on Ukraine is why he will never achieve office. The Doughty St tendency has led the right down a path of infantile populism coloured with aggression that makes Patel a stateswoman and Jenrick a moderate. Face up to it- you're finished as a coherent political force under any of these leaders. All you have left is coarse, populist invective a la Trump, and that is a position of failure. Trying to fight old battles just reminds us how much we loathe these people. You need to press a reset button that isn't Farage or Patel or Jenrick. Won't happen this time though.
Isn’t this statement “ The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever.” showing you doing exactly what you are criticising others for in the bit in bold?
You despise the Tories, that’s absolutely fine, but your wish for them to be done or finished is likely a wish. Many people thought Labour were done or finished after 2019, black Swans and a change in leadership turned things around in one term, there is no reason that this also cannot happen with the Tories so your hubris, confidence and joy at the demise of the Tories might just be clouding your judgement.
Ok Tories, you seriously think they will win the next General Election? Really? Really, hand on heart? I appreciate Labour are not loved, and neither is Reform or the Lib Dems for that matter, but the negatives on the Tories are just way to high for a quick recovery It is delusional to think that all it needs is to "keep buggering on". Unless you press the reset button, there is no historical precedent for a Tory recovery to power in a single Parliament- that's a statement of fact, not of opinion or a wish. You're right, I do think the Tories deserve oblivion, but I've been beaten too many times to have anything other than an ultra realist view of the shiftless sods. So feel free to cheer on the empty shell of dead right wing populism if you like, but the world is moving on. The self indulgent wank of the last government was a total disgrace and a gimmicky, childish, abject failure. Keep playing that game and you will lose, and rightly so. So feel free to keep listening to "non experts", to columnists or self appointed pundits. Much good it will do you.
I don’t think the Tories will win the next election however they “can”. To rule out the possibility is to have completely ignored what happened since 2019 and someone as bright as you would surely not do so unless completely blinkered by hatred.
They are super unlikely to win however we have no idea what will happen economically, politically, geopolitically, personally to Starmer, what will happen with the Tories under new leadership, and so to make such forthright predictions is confusing the wish with reality.
“ there is no historical precedent for a Tory recovery to power in a single Parliament” you are right, until it happens. Just because it hasn’t happened before, strangely it doesn’t mean it cannot ever happen.
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Ummm a few have PhDs. I certainly wouldn't criticise many of my own school teachers but the idea that a large number would walk into academic research positions? No. Some may go to the state sector but I think this is pretty small compensation for the costs of the policy in having to educate more pupils in state schools. However one thing that helps is the declining number of children. That will reduce the cost of education and help stop overcrowding.
If they did go into the state sector it would be mostly grammar schools any ex teachers of closed small private schools went to and the odd outstanding rated free school or academy or primary school or else bigger elite private schools which remained open even with VAT on school fees.
They certainly won't be going to the average comp down the road
Do you actually know any really good teachers?
What makes a good teacher in your average comp, namely being able to control a class mainly for most classes below A Level, is not the same as what makes a good teacher in your average public or grammar school, which is often high enough subject knowledge to prepare most pupils for entrance to Oxbridge and Russell group universities ultimately. Or excellence in music and sport and coaching to that standard
My daughter has taught in both. Your generalisation is utter balls.
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
Though Labour only got 34% of the vote, there are 150 Labour MPs with solid majorities of over 10K (and 26 LibDem MPs with majorities of over 10K )
The Tories have only 5 MPs with over 10K majorities. The 121 Tory MPs are spread very thinly. Toast?
If the Tories can ally with Reform, that 34% is VERY beatable
And as Labour are only going to impoverish and immiserate the country, the chances of a remarkable Labour defeat in 2028 are high
As previously noted "a wish is not a claim upon reality". The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever. The "unacceptable versus the insipid" leadership race shows no sign of turning the Tories around. As for Farage, disappearing up Trumps fundament while trying to crap on Ukraine is why he will never achieve office. The Doughty St tendency has led the right down a path of infantile populism coloured with aggression that makes Patel a stateswoman and Jenrick a moderate. Face up to it- you're finished as a coherent political force under any of these leaders. All you have left is coarse, populist invective a la Trump, and that is a position of failure. Trying to fight old battles just reminds us how much we loathe these people. You need to press a reset button that isn't Farage or Patel or Jenrick. Won't happen this time though.
Isn’t this statement “ The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever.” showing you doing exactly what you are criticising others for in the bit in bold?
You despise the Tories, that’s absolutely fine, but your wish for them to be done or finished is likely a wish. Many people thought Labour were done or finished after 2019, black Swans and a change in leadership turned things around in one term, there is no reason that this also cannot happen with the Tories so your hubris, confidence and joy at the demise of the Tories might just be clouding your judgement.
Ok Tories, you seriously think they will win the next General Election? Really? Really, hand on heart? I appreciate Labour are not loved, and neither is Reform or the Lib Dems for that matter, but the negatives on the Tories are just way to high for a quick recovery It is delusional to think that all it needs is to "keep buggering on". Unless you press the reset button, there is no historical precedent for a Tory recovery to power in a single Parliament- that's a statement of fact, not of opinion or a wish. You're right, I do think the Tories deserve oblivion, but I've been beaten too many times to have anything other than an ultra realist view of the shiftless sods. So feel free to cheer on the empty shell of dead right wing populism if you like, but the world is moving on. The self indulgent wank of the last government was a total disgrace and a gimmicky, childish, abject failure. Keep playing that game and you will lose, and rightly so. So feel free to keep listening to "non experts", to columnists or self appointed pundits. Much good it will do you.
I don’t think the Tories will win the next election however they “can”. To rule out the possibility is to have completely ignored what happened since 2019 and someone as bright as you would surely not do so unless completely blinkered by hatred.
They are super unlikely to win however we have no idea what will happen economically, politically, geopolitically, personally to Starmer, what will happen with the Tories under new leadership, and so to make such forthright predictions is confusing the wish with reality.
“ there is no historical precedent for a Tory recovery to power in a single Parliament” you are right, until it happens. Just because it hasn’t happened before, strangely it doesn’t mean it cannot ever happen.
There isn't while Reform are gaining a significant portion of the right wing votes.
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Ummm a few have PhDs. I certainly wouldn't criticise many of my own school teachers but the idea that a large number would walk into academic research positions? No. Some may go to the state sector but I think this is pretty small compensation for the costs of the policy in having to educate more pupils in state schools. However one thing that helps is the declining number of children. That will reduce the cost of education and help stop overcrowding.
If they did go into the state sector it would be mostly grammar schools any ex teachers of closed small private schools went to and the odd outstanding rated free school or academy or primary school or else bigger elite private schools which remained open even with VAT on school fees.
They certainly won't be going to the average comp down the road
Do you actually know any really good teachers?
What makes a good teacher in your average comp, namely being able to control a class mainly for most classes below A Level, is not the same as what makes a good teacher in your average public or grammar school, which is often high enough subject knowledge to prepare most pupils for entrance to Oxbridge and Russell group universities ultimately. Or excellence in music and sport and coaching to that standard
My daughter has taught in both. Your generalisation is utter balls.
When HYUFD's magisterial pronouncements collide with a reader with first hand knowledge of the matter the pronouncement tends to come off worse
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Ummm a few have PhDs. I certainly wouldn't criticise many of my own school teachers but the idea that a large number would walk into academic research positions? No. Some may go to the state sector but I think this is pretty small compensation for the costs of the policy in having to educate more pupils in state schools. However one thing that helps is the declining number of children. That will reduce the cost of education and help stop overcrowding.
If they did go into the state sector it would be mostly grammar schools any ex teachers of closed small private schools went to and the odd outstanding rated free school or academy or primary school or else bigger elite private schools which remained open even with VAT on school fees.
They certainly won't be going to the average comp down the road
Do you actually know any really good teachers?
What makes a good teacher in your average comp, namely being able to control a class mainly for most classes below A Level, is not the same as what makes a good teacher in your average public or grammar school, which is often high enough subject knowledge to prepare most pupils for entrance to Oxbridge and Russell group universities ultimately. Or excellence in music and sport and coaching to that standard
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
Though Labour only got 34% of the vote, there are 150 Labour MPs with solid majorities of over 10K (and 26 LibDem MPs with majorities of over 10K )
The Tories have only 5 MPs with over 10K majorities. The 121 Tory MPs are spread very thinly. Toast?
If the Tories can ally with Reform, that 34% is VERY beatable
And as Labour are only going to impoverish and immiserate the country, the chances of a remarkable Labour defeat in 2028 are high
As previously noted "a wish is not a claim upon reality". The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever.
Bit of a lack of self-awareness gem, this sentence combo.
Bugger, you posted what I was getting at in a much pithier and more effective way.
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
Your party offer nothing to practically any voter, hence getting absolutely demolished. If Jenrick is the answer you've asked the wrong question.
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Isreal is gunning for this. They want it
We are about to find out
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Ummm a few have PhDs. I certainly wouldn't criticise many of my own school teachers but the idea that a large number would walk into academic research positions? No. Some may go to the state sector but I think this is pretty small compensation for the costs of the policy in having to educate more pupils in state schools. However one thing that helps is the declining number of children. That will reduce the cost of education and help stop overcrowding.
If they did go into the state sector it would be mostly grammar schools any ex teachers of closed small private schools went to and the odd outstanding rated free school or academy or primary school or else bigger elite private schools which remained open even with VAT on school fees.
They certainly won't be going to the average comp down the road
Do you actually know any really good teachers?
What makes a good teacher in your average comp, namely being able to control a class mainly for most classes below A Level, is not the same as what makes a good teacher in your average public or grammar school, which is often high enough subject knowledge to prepare most pupils for entrance to Oxbridge and Russell group universities ultimately. Or excellence in music and sport and coaching to that standard
Are you aware that some people from average comps make it to a top university? For example - me. I was one of about 8, including one who went to Cambridge.
The ability to control a class correlates closely with having very high subject knowledge and an engaging style. For example, setting my head on fire with methane bubbles or using a pupil as a target for the laws of motion.
FWIW is my teacher friend just handed her notice in after 7 years. Complete burnout, recipient of numerous awards etc for working with Ukrainian and Afghan refugees. 1st in Maths + an MSc.
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Isreal is gunning for this. They want it
We are about to find out
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
I remember in May 1997 it really did feel like the dawn of a new era and real change afoot.
This time, it feels much like the deckchairs on the Titanic being reshuffled. Same old Office of Budget Responsibility, same old Supreme Court enforcing ECHR nosturms, same old Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee setting interest rates etc etc.
The Ministers and MPs are reduced to councillors trying to oversee a permanent self governing standing bureaucracy that they have little control of and which has a vested interest in more regulation and therefore more renumerative work for them and their associates.
Quite, but Labour are actively and energetically supporting that asphyxiation of democracy. They want more power to be handed to the OBR for example.
Risible. Attempting a coup, as Trump did, that’s asphyxiating democracy. Saying you’ll put things through the OBR isn’t.
Having a putsch is one way to end democracy - gradually legislating it out of existence is another.
This nonsense really is the last refuge of the defeated Tory Right. If you had any genuine concern about democracy, you'd be looking at America, where the candidate of the Right is openly telling people that if he wins there won't be any need to vote next time!
As Trump is constitutionally barred from a third term as far as he is concerned there isn't, he just needs to get his delayed second term and then he can finish the job of sorting America out
You're giving Trump the benefit of the doubt. Why? He's telling us what he's going (to try) to do, believe him. Last time Pence wasn't prepared to go against the constitution (thanks Dan Quayle), next time Vance has already said he would. "We'll have it fixed so good you're not going to have to vote"
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
I remember in May 1997 it really did feel like the dawn of a new era and real change afoot.
This time, it feels much like the deckchairs on the Titanic being reshuffled. Same old Office of Budget Responsibility, same old Supreme Court enforcing ECHR nosturms, same old Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee setting interest rates etc etc.
The Ministers and MPs are reduced to councillors trying to oversee a permanent self governing standing bureaucracy that they have little control of and which has a vested interest in more regulation and therefore more renumerative work for them and their associates.
Quite, but Labour are actively and energetically supporting that asphyxiation of democracy. They want more power to be handed to the OBR for example.
Risible. Attempting a coup, as Trump did, that’s asphyxiating democracy. Saying you’ll put things through the OBR isn’t.
Having a putsch is one way to end democracy - gradually legislating it out of existence is another.
This nonsense really is the last refuge of the defeated Tory Right. If you had any genuine concern about democracy, you'd be looking at America, where the candidate of the Right is openly telling people that if he wins there won't be any need to vote next time!
As Trump is constitutionally barred from a third term as far as he is concerned there isn't, he just needs to get his delayed second term and then he can finish the job of sorting America out
How about DTjnr?
Donald Trump, Jr. has barely enough brain waves to power a toaster FAR less than his daddy even; Ivanka is far smarter, which is why she is MUCH less MAGA.
Counter argument of course is George Bush the Elder > George Bush the Younger. BUT think that's exception that proves the rule, that POTUS dynasties are exceedingly exceptional.
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
Jenrick backs whatever he thinks will get him further up the greasy pole. His problem is not ideaology, it is such a lack of ideaology/beliefs including personal morals or any sense of duty beyond that to himself, that he is an utterly empty vessel, interested only in further agrandisement and power for its own sake.
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Isreal is gunning for this. They want it
We are about to find out
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Isreal is gunning for this. They want it
We are about to find out
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
Though Labour only got 34% of the vote, there are 150 Labour MPs with solid majorities of over 10K (and 26 LibDem MPs with majorities of over 10K )
The Tories have only 5 MPs with over 10K majorities. The 121 Tory MPs are spread very thinly. Toast?
If the Tories can ally with Reform, that 34% is VERY beatable
And as Labour are only going to impoverish and immiserate the country, the chances of a remarkable Labour defeat in 2028 are high
As previously noted "a wish is not a claim upon reality". The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever. The "unacceptable versus the insipid" leadership race shows no sign of turning the Tories around. As for Farage, disappearing up Trumps fundament while trying to crap on Ukraine is why he will never achieve office. The Doughty St tendency has led the right down a path of infantile populism coloured with aggression that makes Patel a stateswoman and Jenrick a moderate. Face up to it- you're finished as a coherent political force under any of these leaders. All you have left is coarse, populist invective a la Trump, and that is a position of failure. Trying to fight old battles just reminds us how much we loathe these people. You need to press a reset button that isn't Farage or Patel or Jenrick. Won't happen this time though.
Isn’t this statement “ The Tories are done for quite a while, maybe forever.” showing you doing exactly what you are criticising others for in the bit in bold?
You despise the Tories, that’s absolutely fine, but your wish for them to be done or finished is likely a wish. Many people thought Labour were done or finished after 2019, black Swans and a change in leadership turned things around in one term, there is no reason that this also cannot happen with the Tories so your hubris, confidence and joy at the demise of the Tories might just be clouding your judgement.
Ok Tories, you seriously think they will win the next General Election? Really? Really, hand on heart? I appreciate Labour are not loved, and neither is Reform or the Lib Dems for that matter, but the negatives on the Tories are just way to high for a quick recovery It is delusional to think that all it needs is to "keep buggering on". Unless you press the reset button, there is no historical precedent for a Tory recovery to power in a single Parliament- that's a statement of fact, not of opinion or a wish. You're right, I do think the Tories deserve oblivion, but I've been beaten too many times to have anything other than an ultra realist view of the shiftless sods. So feel free to cheer on the empty shell of dead right wing populism if you like, but the world is moving on. The self indulgent wank of the last government was a total disgrace and a gimmicky, childish, abject failure. Keep playing that game and you will lose, and rightly so. So feel free to keep listening to "non experts", to columnists or self appointed pundits. Much good it will do you.
I don’t think the Tories will win the next election however they “can”. To rule out the possibility is to have completely ignored what happened since 2019 and someone as bright as you would surely not do so unless completely blinkered by hatred.
They are super unlikely to win however we have no idea what will happen economically, politically, geopolitically, personally to Starmer, what will happen with the Tories under new leadership, and so to make such forthright predictions is confusing the wish with reality.
“ there is no historical precedent for a Tory recovery to power in a single Parliament” you are right, until it happens. Just because it hasn’t happened before, strangely it doesn’t mean it cannot ever happen.
I don't think Tories have shown the slightest curiosity into why they are in such a disastrous situation, or even much awareness that they are in this situation, let alone think about how they might get out of it.
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Isreal is gunning for this. They want it
We are about to find out
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
Did they not factor in that there would obviously be a reduced number of private school pupils?
If you read the article, the headline is the worst case of three scenarios. Granted, even the best case falls short of Labour expectations but by nowhere near as much - the VAT measure would raise £1.15 billion rather than £1.6 billion.
No one seems to be suggesting Eton, Winchester, Harrow or Dulwich will go to the wall over this but there are a lot of smaller schools, who, as we know, would struggle to survive.
On the plus side, the reduction in private opportunities for teachers should go some way towards relieving the state school teacher retention crisis, which means the state won't have to pay them so much. I wonder if that is included in the modelling.
Many private school teachers would give up teaching rather than teach in the average comp, plenty have Phds and could be academic researchers in universities or the private sector instead for example
Ummm a few have PhDs. I certainly wouldn't criticise many of my own school teachers but the idea that a large number would walk into academic research positions? No. Some may go to the state sector but I think this is pretty small compensation for the costs of the policy in having to educate more pupils in state schools. However one thing that helps is the declining number of children. That will reduce the cost of education and help stop overcrowding.
If they did go into the state sector it would be mostly grammar schools any ex teachers of closed small private schools went to and the odd outstanding rated free school or academy or primary school or else bigger elite private schools which remained open even with VAT on school fees.
They certainly won't be going to the average comp down the road
Do you actually know any really good teachers?
What makes a good teacher in your average comp, namely being able to control a class mainly for most classes below A Level, is not the same as what makes a good teacher in your average public or grammar school, which is often high enough subject knowledge to prepare most pupils for entrance to Oxbridge and Russell group universities ultimately. Or excellence in music and sport and coaching to that standard
Are you aware that some people from average comps make it to a top university? For example - me. I was one of about 8, including one who went to Cambridge.
The ability to control a class correlates closely with having very high subject knowledge and an engaging style. For example, setting my head on fire with methane bubbles or using a pupil as a target for the laws of motion.
FWIW is my teacher friend just handed her notice in after 7 years. Complete burnout, recipient of numerous awards etc for working with Ukrainian and Afghan refugees. 1st in Maths + an MSc.
Nearly 20% of independent school teachers have Oxbridge degrees, around 5% of state school teachers have Oxbridge degrees.
61% of independent school teachers and 56% of grammar school teachers got a 1st or 2.1 degree. 54% of comprehensive/academy school teachers got a 2.2 or a 3rd or Pass degree and 77% of secondary modern/high school teachers got a 3rd or pass degree https://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/teacherqual-1.pdf
Rep. Don Beyer of Virginia, the first member of Congress to endorse Buttigieg for president, told POLITICO he is also backing Buttigieg.
“I’m sure they’re thinking about battleground states, although it hasn’t been since 1960 that a vice president helped actually take their particular state,” Beyer said in an interview of the Harris campaign. “So it’s not clear that putting [North Carolina Gov.] Roy Cooper on the ticket would help you win North Carolina or that Josh [Shapiro] helps you in Pennsylvania, but I’m not subject to their research. I do know, just as a person with extraordinary political skills, a good reputation, well liked, and done a great job as secretary of Transportation, Pete would bring a lot to the ticket.”
There are more quotidian reasons Buttigieg could continue to accelerate in the process. The Democratic Party is expected to hold a roll call vote on a running mate by Aug. 7, and the sheer mechanics of introducing a nominee could mean the pick could come as early as this week. That means a rapidly accelerated vetting process could favor Buttigieg...
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
If the LDs get back to the 18% of the Ashdown era, never mind the 22% of the Kennedy/Clegg era, the Tories are finished.
The biggest problem Labour have coming down the tracks as far as I can see is all the consequences of the ming vase strategy coming home to roost at the budget.
They deliberately did not try to sell any policies to the electorate at the election and are now going to try and justify policies after the event. I said at the time they needed to be bolder and they weren’t. This is a risky moment for them.
Nah they got a Liam Byrne note * 1000 hall pass for the next few years.
Besides, the political opposition is currently at its weakest.
Elections can do two things. One is to give a mandate for the future, the other is to pass judgement on the past. The second is way more important. If (and it's a non-trivial if) Labour can point to real improvements by May 2028, anything bad they do now won't matter.
But all the signs indicate they have zero ideas and zero energy. And they will thus achieve nothing, indeed, in areas like asylum and immigration they might be far worse (incredibly)
So what happens now - the first 100 days - really IS important. Not pivotal - but important
Remember starmer got that majority with just 34% of the vote. Less than Corbyn. He could easily lose the next GE on that basis, despite all those MPs
I remember in May 1997 it really did feel like the dawn of a new era and real change afoot.
This time, it feels much like the deckchairs on the Titanic being reshuffled. Same old Office of Budget Responsibility, same old Supreme Court enforcing ECHR nosturms, same old Bank of England Monetary Policy Committee setting interest rates etc etc.
The Ministers and MPs are reduced to councillors trying to oversee a permanent self governing standing bureaucracy that they have little control of and which has a vested interest in more regulation and therefore more renumerative work for them and their associates.
Quite, but Labour are actively and energetically supporting that asphyxiation of democracy. They want more power to be handed to the OBR for example.
Risible. Attempting a coup, as Trump did, that’s asphyxiating democracy. Saying you’ll put things through the OBR isn’t.
Having a putsch is one way to end democracy - gradually legislating it out of existence is another.
This nonsense really is the last refuge of the defeated Tory Right. If you had any genuine concern about democracy, you'd be looking at America, where the candidate of the Right is openly telling people that if he wins there won't be any need to vote next time!
As Trump is constitutionally barred from a third term as far as he is concerned there isn't, he just needs to get his delayed second term and then he can finish the job of sorting America out
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
Your party offer nothing to practically any voter, hence getting absolutely demolished. If Jenrick is the answer you've asked the wrong question.
Well you didn't even vote Tory in 2019 so obviously you will say that
Rep. Don Beyer of Virginia, the first member of Congress to endorse Buttigieg for president, told POLITICO he is also backing Buttigieg.
“I’m sure they’re thinking about battleground states, although it hasn’t been since 1960 that a vice president helped actually take their particular state,” Beyer said in an interview of the Harris campaign. “So it’s not clear that putting [North Carolina Gov.] Roy Cooper on the ticket would help you win North Carolina or that Josh [Shapiro] helps you in Pennsylvania, but I’m not subject to their research. I do know, just as a person with extraordinary political skills, a good reputation, well liked, and done a great job as secretary of Transportation, Pete would bring a lot to the ticket.”
There are more quotidian reasons Buttigieg could continue to accelerate in the process. The Democratic Party is expected to hold a roll call vote on a running mate by Aug. 7, and the sheer mechanics of introducing a nominee could mean the pick could come as early as this week. That means a rapidly accelerated vetting process could favor Buttigieg...
I also don't think he'll get it, but he and Shapiro are the two I'm green on.
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Isreal is gunning for this. They want it
We are about to find out
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
Yes, I concur. Whatever happens it is highly unlikely to match the 1-2 million dead in Iran- Iraq
However it has the terrifying potential to drag in multiple states
There are claims that it was a wayward Israeli Iron Dome missile (fired due to a Hezbollah attack on Mount Hermon military base nearby) that caused the deaths and the victims were Druze Arab Children.
The Iran Iraq war had peculiarly little international impact for such a long and bloody war.
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
Your party offer nothing to practically any voter, hence getting absolutely demolished. If Jenrick is the answer you've asked the wrong question.
Well you didn't even vote Tory in 2019 so obviously you will say that
I don't see Jenrick's electoral appeal. I just think people will see him as a poisonous Tory boy. He same some of the right things but I don't think he's the right person it this time to say them.
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
Your party offer nothing to practically any voter, hence getting absolutely demolished. If Jenrick is the answer you've asked the wrong question.
Well you didn't even vote Tory in 2019 so obviously you will say that
I don't see Jenrick's electoral appeal. I just think people will see him as a poisonous Tory boy. He same some of the right things but I don't think he's the right person it this time to say them.
Starmer doesn't have much charisma or electoral appeal either unlike Blair in 1997, Boris was well ahead of him in 2021, by 2024 he was just not Corbyn and not the Tories.
So any Tory leader will likely have a more effective time in opposition than Hague did once Starmer has to make unpopular decisions as PM
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
If the LDs get back to the 18% of the Ashdown era, never mind the 22% of the Kennedy/Clegg era, the Tories are finished.
On neither count they aren't as most of the LD increase would likely come from Labour as it did then, boosting the Tories in Tory v Labour marginals under FPTP as it did in 2005
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
Back to the central mystery.
To believe the cheerleaders, Rwanda was ready to go and bound to deter. After all that politics, all that money, the government was this close to sending people to Africa and solving the problem.
And then Rishi called an election, putting the scheme on ice and then in the morgue. Why?
(My theory is that it was a twisted fantasy that wouldn't have worked in reality and wasn't really set up to work. But as a suburban science teacher in the state sector, what do I know about anything?)
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Isreal is gunning for this. They want it
We are about to find out
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
I would have thought so until they managed to turn Gaza into Stalingrad. Two fronts won't end well.
We are learning fast that current technology favours the weaker side disproportionately when they are defending from advances.
In no way does Gaza = Stalingrad. Stalingrad saw over a million Russian cassulties, and the capture and destruction of the German 6th army. How many Israelis have died fighting their Stalingrad? How many Gazans? There are no winners here, but as a comparison, that’s utter hyperbole, and totally wrong.
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
"if true"
are you really unable to figure out if it's true or not?
Out of interest, what is it about conflicts involving the only majority Jewish nation on earth that so vexes you, against say those ongoing in Yemen, Somali, Sudan, Burma or the Maghreb?
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
Back to the central mystery.
To believe the cheerleaders, Rwanda was ready to go and bound to deter. After all that politics, all that money, the government was this close to sending people to Africa and solving the problem.
And then Rishi called an election, putting the scheme on ice and then in the morgue. Why?
(My theory is that it was a twisted fantasy that wouldn't have worked in reality and wasn't really set up to work. But as a suburban science teacher in the state sector, what do I know about anything?)
Interesting race developing at Spa. I don’t know quite how Hamilton managed to be leading the race, but impressive stuff from him.
He should cancel his move to Ferrari.
He needs to bring his race engineer and a couple of strategists with him.
Hamilton timed his move to Mercedes perfectly. I see no reason atm to think he's made a mistake now. We don't know what he saw in Ferrari's offering for the 2025 cars and beyond.
Personally, I'd strongly argue that 'fair' and 'right' have been conspicuously absent from Christianity over the centuries.
Christianity may be in decline in Europe and much of the West but then most Western nations and most of Europe are in population decline too with below replacement level birthrates.
Christianity is growing fastest in Africa where the birthrate and population growth is also now the highest on earth
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
Back to the central mystery.
To believe the cheerleaders, Rwanda was ready to go and bound to deter. After all that politics, all that money, the government was this close to sending people to Africa and solving the problem.
And then Rishi called an election, putting the scheme on ice and then in the morgue. Why?
(My theory is that it was a twisted fantasy that wouldn't have worked in reality and wasn't really set up to work. But as a suburban science teacher in the state sector, what do I know about anything?)
As an offshore processing hub, Rwanda may have worked, and been legal. You wouldn't have been able to hang out in London making money cash in hand. But as planned, it was performative idiocy.
“Most smart atheists I know have been approaching this conclusion over the past few years.
Christianity is the West's immune system.
As a believer, it's far more than that. But as a sociocultural observer, it's obvious a great house can't stand if you destroy its foundations.”
Nah. I love the 'smart atheists' bit: the usual bullshit than anyone who agrees with me is smart, whilst getting a dig at anyone who dares to disagree. Generally, when someone writes that, they're writing b/s. Especially when it is the first thing said in a statement.
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
Your party offer nothing to practically any voter, hence getting absolutely demolished. If Jenrick is the answer you've asked the wrong question.
Well you didn't even vote Tory in 2019 so obviously you will say that
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
“Most smart atheists I know have been approaching this conclusion over the past few years.
Christianity is the West's immune system.
As a believer, it's far more than that. But as a sociocultural observer, it's obvious a great house can't stand if you destroy its foundations.”
Nah. I love the 'smart atheists' bit: the usual bullshit than anyone who agrees with me is smart, whilst getting a dig at anyone who dares to disagree. Generally, when someone writes that, they're writing b/s. Especially when it is the first thing said in a statement.
Thanks for such an erudite and considered reply on whether a society can maintain a sufficiently strong moral base without a religion to underpin it. “BS”.
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
"if true"
are you really unable to figure out if it's true or not?
There will be an IQ level at which the concept of “per capita” will be impossible to grasp for someone with limited intelligence. Is that 100, tho? I have my doubts. I’d guess ~90
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
Covid showed journalists struggled with numbers.
It really did - especially the concept of “exponentiality”
This is an ineradicable flaw in democracy. A lot of people are so stupid they really shouldn’t be voting. However, I guess we have the “wisdom of crowds” as a countervailing force. Somehow people en masse are smarter than individuals
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
Covid showed journalists struggled with numbers.
It really did - especially the concept of “exponentiality”
This is an ineradicable flaw in democracy. A lot of people are so stupid they really shouldn’t be voting. However, I guess we have the “wisdom of crowds” as a countervailing force. Somehow people en masse are smarter than individuals
I don't get the feeling they reflected on this weakness and did something about it.
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
Jenrick backs whatever he thinks will get him further up the greasy pole. His problem is not ideaology, it is such a lack of ideaology/beliefs including personal morals or any sense of duty beyond that to himself, that he is an utterly empty vessel, interested only in further agrandisement and power for its own sake.
You could say that about virtually any successful politician of the last 30 years: Starmer, Cameron, Clegg, Blair, etc. etc. etc.
Jenrick fits right into the current governing class and I predict a triumphant future for him.
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
Covid showed journalists struggled with numbers.
It really did - especially the concept of “exponentiality”
This is an ineradicable flaw in democracy. A lot of people are so stupid they really shouldn’t be voting. However, I guess we have the “wisdom of crowds” as a countervailing force. Somehow people en masse are smarter than individuals
It's more than.
Robert Peston wasn't the only one who couldn't understand why if we tested more that confirmed cases would also rise.
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
Covid showed journalists struggled with numbers.
It really did - especially the concept of “exponentiality”
This is an ineradicable flaw in democracy. A lot of people are so stupid they really shouldn’t be voting. However, I guess we have the “wisdom of crowds” as a countervailing force. Somehow people en masse are smarter than individuals
It's more than.
Robert Peston wasn't the only one who couldn't understand why if we tested more that confirmed cases would also rise.
Highlight was hin getting schooled not once, but twice by JVT, after dropping his keen amateur science bollocks.
Nasty people on TwiX are claming that anyone with an IQ under 100 - 50% of the population - cannot understand the concept of “per capita”, no matter how hard they try
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
Covid showed journalists struggled with numbers.
It really did - especially the concept of “exponentiality”
This is an ineradicable flaw in democracy. A lot of people are so stupid they really shouldn’t be voting. However, I guess we have the “wisdom of crowds” as a countervailing force. Somehow people en masse are smarter than individuals
It's more than.
Robert Peston wasn't the only one who couldn't understand why if we tested more that confirmed cases would also rise.
Highlight was hin getting schooled not once, but twice by JVT, after dropping his keen amateur science bollocks.
JVT failed to grasp, early on, that masks are quite effective in stopping the spread - they don’t protect the wearer, they protect those around the wearer, and vice versa
A pretty basic logic test. And he flunked
I don’t think any of the boffins in the covid campaign covered themselves with glory, any more than the politicians (with the notable and honourable exception of those involved in the creation, funding and distribution of the vax)
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Isreal is gunning for this. They want it
We are about to find out
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
It is indeed bleak. On the “upside” the Israelis have made menacing noises like this, before - and done nothing. Hezbollah is a much more potent enemy than Hamas. So maybe it will fizzle out
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
Isreal is gunning for this. They want it
We are about to find out
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
I would have thought so until they managed to turn Gaza into Stalingrad. Two fronts won't end well.
We are learning fast that current technology favours the weaker side disproportionately when they are defending from advances.
We were repeatedly told that there would be hundreds of Israeli dead every week in Gaza.
In reality Israeli casualties have been close to trivial.
Hezbollah would be entirely different. Well armed and well trained and with lots of guns and missiles - and direct help from Iran
The last time Israel tackled Hezbollah it was a bloody score draw. Could be even worse for Israel this time - unless the USA intervenes. And therein is the danger - this turns into a US-Iran war
Jenrick is absolutely the leader the Tories need. Morality. Brains. Emotional IQ.
Well, the barrel is truly being scraped. None of the above is not an option, and it seems to me that whoever wins, they could end up losing more seats next time.
Tories for third party in the 2030s? It is beginning to look like it really could happen.
The whole party has been on transmit for a very long time, and the voters seem to have changed frequency.
If the LDs or Reform didn't overtake the Tories for third place this time they never will.
Plus remember even Ed Miliband's Labour led half the polls from 2010 to 2015 after getting just 29% in 2010 and of course even Hague's Tories led in 2000 when the fuel crisis was on.
If the economy is poor in 4 or 5 years time and immigration rising without proper controls there will be a swing back from Labour to Tories
Where are the new Tory voters going to come from to replace the ones who are dying off?
This is the nightmare the Tories have to face into. They *know* they are right. They *know* that Rwanda would have worked. But the voters largely disagree and disagree in very large numbers.
They need policies that appeal to people younger than 70. And until they realise that their existing ideas are shit, they will fail. Aspiration. Sound finances. Business. How on earth have they managed to bin off all those values?
They can rely on Labour to fail, badly. And so far I’d say that’s the likeliest outcome
Won't be enough. If its a protest vote against a failing government not delivering the policies they want, it won't be a switch to a mad Tory party being led by a loon advocating God knows what.
Under FPTP that remains the main alternative in most seats, plenty thought Thatcher a mad rightwing loon in 1975 too. Jenrick isn't even that rightwing, he backed Remain in 2016 for example before backing Brexit once Leave won
Jenrick backs whatever he thinks will get him further up the greasy pole. His problem is not ideaology, it is such a lack of ideaology/beliefs including personal morals or any sense of duty beyond that to himself, that he is an utterly empty vessel, interested only in further agrandisement and power for its own sake.
You could say that about virtually any successful politician of the last 30 years: Starmer, Cameron, Clegg, Blair, etc. etc. etc.
Jenrick fits right into the current governing class and I predict a triumphant future for him.
They were good at hiding their ambition. Jenrick is not.
It's quite clear to anyone with half a brain that the only thing Robert Jenrick believes in is Robert Jenrick.
Comments
https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2024/jul/28/israel-gaza-war-strikes-hezbollah-lebanon-golan-heights
You despise the Tories, that’s absolutely fine, but your wish for them to be done or finished is likely a wish. Many people thought Labour were done or finished after 2019, black Swans and a change in leadership turned things around in one term, there is no reason that this also cannot happen with the Tories so your hubris, confidence and joy at the demise of the Tories might just be clouding your judgement.
They certainly won't be going to the average comp down the road
You're right, I do think the Tories deserve oblivion, but I've been beaten too many times to have anything other than an ultra realist view of the shiftless sods. So feel free to cheer on the empty shell of dead right wing populism if you like, but the world is moving on.
The self indulgent wank of the last government was a total disgrace and a gimmicky, childish, abject failure. Keep playing that game and you will lose, and rightly so. So feel free to keep listening to "non experts", to columnists or self appointed pundits. Much good it will do you.
However it is hard for them to ignore a missile strike like this and if they don’t crush Hezbollah it means northern Israel could become uninhabitable
They are super unlikely to win however we have no idea what will happen economically, politically, geopolitically, personally to Starmer, what will happen with the Tories under new leadership, and so to make such forthright predictions is confusing the wish with reality.
“ there is no historical precedent for a Tory recovery to power in a single Parliament” you are right, until it happens. Just because it hasn’t happened before, strangely it doesn’t mean it cannot ever happen.
Your generalisation is utter balls.
“I can't overstate this:
The Middle East is now potentially hours away from the most devastating war in its bloody history.
A Israel-Hezbollah war would likely yield a shocking number of fatalities and destruction.
The US knew this day would come. Our leaders have failed.”
https://x.com/jschanzer/status/1817285466120745425?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
The ability to control a class correlates closely with having very high subject knowledge and an engaging style. For example, setting my head on fire with methane bubbles or using a pupil as a target for the laws of motion.
FWIW is my teacher friend just handed her notice in after 7 years. Complete burnout, recipient of numerous awards etc for working with Ukrainian and Afghan refugees. 1st in Maths + an MSc.
Now an Israel-Iran war might do so.
Why? He's telling us what he's going (to try) to do, believe him.
Last time Pence wasn't prepared to go against the constitution (thanks Dan Quayle), next time Vance has already said he would.
"We'll have it fixed so good you're not going to have to vote"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE7xoHJkgvE
Counter argument of course is George Bush the Elder > George Bush the Younger. BUT think that's exception that proves the rule, that POTUS dynasties are exceedingly exceptional.
We are learning fast that current technology favours the weaker side disproportionately when they are defending from advances.
Iraq
However it has the terrifying potential to drag in multiple states
Over half of all independent school teachers went to Russell Group universities compared to 40% in state schools
https://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Teaching-by-Degrees-1.pdf.
61% of independent school teachers and 56% of grammar school teachers got a 1st or 2.1 degree. 54% of comprehensive/academy school teachers got a 2.2 or a 3rd or Pass degree and 77% of secondary modern/high school teachers got a 3rd or pass degree
https://www.suttontrust.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/teacherqual-1.pdf
https://www.politico.com/news/2024/07/28/pete-buttigieg-longshot-vp-harris-00171515
… “He’s a veteran, he knows his shit, he’s our best communicator,” Gluesenkamp Perez told POLITICO. “He and I don’t agree on everything, but that’s gonna be the case with anyone she picks.”
Rep. Don Beyer of Virginia, the first member of Congress to endorse Buttigieg for president, told POLITICO he is also backing Buttigieg.
“I’m sure they’re thinking about battleground states, although it hasn’t been since 1960 that a vice president helped actually take their particular state,” Beyer said in an interview of the Harris campaign. “So it’s not clear that putting [North Carolina Gov.] Roy Cooper on the ticket would help you win North Carolina or that Josh [Shapiro] helps you in Pennsylvania, but I’m not subject to their research. I do know, just as a person with extraordinary political skills, a good reputation, well liked, and done a great job as secretary of Transportation, Pete would bring a lot to the ticket.”
There are more quotidian reasons Buttigieg could continue to accelerate in the process. The Democratic Party is expected to hold a roll call vote on a running mate by Aug. 7, and the sheer mechanics of introducing a nominee could mean the pick could come as early as this week. That means a rapidly accelerated vetting process could favor Buttigieg...
As does Vance.
Both for understandable reasons.
But it can affect decisions.
I think he's gonna get something someday though.
The Iran Iraq war had peculiarly little international impact for such a long and bloody war.
So any Tory leader will likely have a more effective time in opposition than Hague did once Starmer has to make unpopular decisions as PM
I don’t know quite how Hamilton managed to be leading the race, but impressive stuff from him.
To believe the cheerleaders, Rwanda was ready to go and bound to deter. After all that politics, all that money, the government was this close to sending people to Africa and solving the problem.
And then Rishi called an election, putting the scheme on ice and then in the morgue. Why?
(My theory is that it was a twisted fantasy that wouldn't have worked in reality and wasn't really set up to work. But as a suburban science teacher in the state sector, what do I know about anything?)
There are no winners here, but as a comparison, that’s utter hyperbole, and totally wrong.
If true, this seems to include quite a few major journalists
🇬🇧 Exclusive 🇪🇸
Keir Starmer discussed a free movement deal for young people with the Spanish prime minister earlier this month.
Pedro Sánchez proposed a deal in private talks on July 18 at Blenheim. Starmer said he’d take the idea away
https://x.com/benrileysmith/status/1817308730456944805
are you really unable to figure out if it's true or not?
"Unless there is more bravery to stand up for what is fair and right, Christianity will perish"
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1817273263761817710
Personally, I'd strongly argue that 'fair' and 'right' have been conspicuously absent from Christianity over the centuries.
“Most smart atheists I know have been approaching this conclusion over the past few years.
Christianity is the West's immune system.
As a believer, it's far more than that. But as a sociocultural observer, it's obvious a great house can't stand if you destroy its foundations.”
Christianity is growing fastest in Africa where the birthrate and population growth is also now the highest on earth
a) split the party in a month
b) split the party in a week
c) be forced to step aside due to rumours of horizontal jogging?
It really did - especially the concept of “exponentiality”
This is an ineradicable flaw in democracy. A lot of people are so stupid they really shouldn’t be voting. However, I guess we have the “wisdom of crowds” as a countervailing force. Somehow people en masse are smarter than individuals
Last couple of laps will be tasty.
Especially with Piastri flying.
Jenrick fits right into the current governing class and I predict a triumphant future for him.
Robert Peston wasn't the only one who couldn't understand why if we tested more that confirmed cases would also rise.
A pretty basic logic test. And he flunked
I don’t think any of the boffins in the covid campaign covered themselves with glory, any more than the politicians (with the notable and honourable exception of those involved in the creation, funding and distribution of the vax)
In reality Israeli casualties have been close to trivial.
The last time Israel tackled Hezbollah it was a bloody score draw. Could be even worse for Israel this time - unless the USA intervenes. And therein is the danger - this turns into a US-Iran war
It's quite clear to anyone with half a brain that the only thing Robert Jenrick believes in is Robert Jenrick.
72 runs off the first 6 overs