Minnesota has voted for every Democratic candidate since 1976. If Harris is stupid enough to pick Walz over Shapiro, governor of PA ie the key swing state this election, then Trump has just been given a massive get out of jail card after he picked Vance as his VP pick
It's not really clear that the VP candidate helps deliver their state, IIUC it only seems to work if the state is very teensy.
Very sad to see Muslims in Birmingham purposely going to a pub and attacking a lone white man. Looking to beat up a white person.
Social media has caused a frenzy and I think we need drastic action over it in the next few days. Rumours are leading to violence and revenge violence
It's hard to see what can be done? Assuming we're not in favour is Chinese style "regulation" of certain internet platforms, then it's hard to know what can be done?
Hopefully the weather will turn unsettled soon... You never get riots in the cold and wet and sleet and fog of January lol! 😂
Minnesota has voted for every Democratic candidate since 1976. If Harris is stupid enough to pick Walz over Shapiro, governor of PA ie the key swing state this election, then Trump has just been given a massive get out of jail card after he picked Vance as his VP pick
It's not really clear that the VP candidate helps deliver their state, IIUC it only seems to work if the state is very teensy.
Latest Pennsylvania poll is Harris 45% Trump 45% Kennedy 4%.
In 1960 LBJ certainly delivered Texas for JFK, he likely would have lost the state otherwise (which was also incumbent President IKE's birthplace and Nixon was his VP)
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
They’re paying Apple et al vast amounts to be made the default search engine on their platforms.
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
I mean, isn't that inherently part of the point of anti-monopoly rules? That in the long run forcing some competition and variety is better, even if in the present doing so would be worse as the monopoly is because one is a lot better than the others? It feels like how benign dictatorship seems like it would probably be quite effective, but inevitably the next one won't be benign.
A lot of industries seem to narrow down to a big two/three/four in the end regardless.
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
Microsoft itself has faced judgements against it for monopoly practices of course
So even more US voters think Harris is very liberal than think Trump very conservative
I don't think Trump is very conservative. He's authoritarian, he's massively corrupt but his political ideology is all over the place. He does have very conservative people around him and as long as they assure him that America will love him for his actions he'll do anything they say.
You can understand which world leaders the Loser likes if you remember that he admires power, especially in those who inherited it. Thus, for example, his love for North Korean Kim. Who heads that strange combination, a Communist monarchy.
Google have such a grip on the market now I wouldn't know if their search engine is good or shit, which I guess is part of the problem. I would guess most younger people don't even consider the possibility of using something else besides whatever comes on their phone unless they are some kind of super nerd who uses DuckDuckGo or something.
Google have such a grip on the market now I wouldn't know if their search engine is good or shit, which I guess is part of the problem. I would guess most younger people don't even consider the possibility of using something else besides whatever comes on their phone unless they are some kind of super nerd who uses DuckDuckGo or something.
it's crap now it basically just a reddit search engine plus ads
Notion that Pennsylvania is lost, utterly lost! to Kamala Harris IF she "rejects" (bs) Josh Shapiro for VP, is pile of opossum poop.
I would hope whichever one is picked will campaign like hell for whoever is on the ticket with Harris regardless, so really it comes down to which, if either, will play best nationally? Does one please a target demographic better than the other, or repel another one less?
If not, or if it is so close it makes little difference, then it's just a case of going all in on Harris and Kamalamentum.
This actually makes some sense. I know in Belfast one of the big issues is the massive growth in the population of non work permit types being housed in small zones of working class dominated housing because there is a bit of a non native population in the wider area.
One flaw though, how about promptly sending those that arent genuinely under threat back home.
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
I remember accidentally stumbling across the Google search engine in either 1998 or 1999 and instantly recognising that it was about a million times better than any other search engine at the time. It's amazing that the situation hasn't significantly changed since then. (The way I realised this was because with all other search engines if you made a slight error with the search it wouldn't know what you were talking about, whereas Google was able to work it out, even back then).
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
I mean, isn't that inherently part of the point of anti-monopoly rules? That in the long run forcing some competition and variety is better, even if in the present doing so would be worse as the monopoly is because one is a lot better than the others? It feels like how benign dictatorship seems like it would probably be quite effective, but inevitably the next one won't be benign.
A lot of industries seem to narrow down to a big two/three/four in the end regardless.
I thought the point of anti-monopoly rules was to allow other, equally good, systems/companies to compete, not to prop up useless 5th rate systems by puishing the ones that actually work. We already have a system where Google is not as good as it once was bcause of all the rules that have been imposed on it, particularly by European regulators. They seem convinced that lowest common denominator is a viable and successful policy.
Actually, there is nothing surprising about "Liberal Republicans" -- if you know a little American history. The party of Lincoln favored free speech and free men from the beginning. They favored free trade only within the US, but 2.5 out of 3 isn't bad.
The Republican Party generally supports our civil rights laws, and always has. Since WW II, it has been, mostly, a supporter of free trade. NAFTA was proposed by Reagan and negotiated by GHWB. (It was ratified by Bill Clinton, who adhered to the traditional Southern Democratic policies of his youth. At the time, southerners wanted to be able to buy manufactured goods from, for example, the UK, rather than pay the higher prices demanded by northern manufacturers.)
In general, since Reagan, the Republican Party has tended to oppose restrictions on free speech imposed by "campaign finance reform" bills. A couple of decades ago, the ACLU was on their side on that issue -- but that was the old ACLU.
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
I mean, isn't that inherently part of the point of anti-monopoly rules? That in the long run forcing some competition and variety is better, even if in the present doing so would be worse as the monopoly is because one is a lot better than the others? It feels like how benign dictatorship seems like it would probably be quite effective, but inevitably the next one won't be benign.
A lot of industries seem to narrow down to a big two/three/four in the end regardless.
I thought the point of anti-monopoly rules was to allow other, equally good, systems/companies to compete, not to prop up useless 5th rate systems by puishing the ones that actually work. We already have a system where Google is not as good as it once was bcause of all the rules that have been imposed on it, particularly by European regulators. They seem convinced that lowest common denominator is a viable and successful policy.
Google hasn't gone to shit because of rules imposed by European regulators, it's gone to shit because they're optimizing for engagement instead of useful information.
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
I remember accidentally stumbling across the Google search engine in either 1998 or 1999 and instantly recognising that it was about a million times better than any other search engine at the time. It's amazing that the situation hasn't significantly changed since then. (The way I realised this was because with all other search engines if you made a slight error with the search it wouldn't know what you were talking about, whereas Google was able to work it out, even back then).
It has changed, Google is way worse. If you want a half-decent search engine nowadays you have to pay for it, for instance use kagi.com.
Notion that Pennsylvania is lost, utterly lost! to Kamala Harris IF she "rejects" (bs) Josh Shapiro for VP, is pile of opossum poop.
I would hope whichever one is picked will campaign like hell for whoever is on the ticket with Harris regardless, so really it comes down to which, if either, will play best nationally? Does one please a target demographic better than the other, or repel another one less?
If not, or if it is so close it makes little difference, then it's just a case of going all in on Harris and Kamalamentum.
Historically one major factor in recent decades with respect to a POTUS nominee's VP pick, is personal chemistry and comfort level. Certainly some White House winners and also also-rans, have lived long enough to regret NOT taking this into greater account.
For example, Richard Nixon re: Spiro Agnew; and John McCann re: Sarah Palin.
Though worth noting that in other cases, POTUS nominees have erred perhaps, by selecting a running mate with whom they were TOO damn comfortable.
For example, George Bush the Elder re: Dan Quayle; and possibly Donald Trump re: JD Vance.
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
I mean, isn't that inherently part of the point of anti-monopoly rules? That in the long run forcing some competition and variety is better, even if in the present doing so would be worse as the monopoly is because one is a lot better than the others? It feels like how benign dictatorship seems like it would probably be quite effective, but inevitably the next one won't be benign.
A lot of industries seem to narrow down to a big two/three/four in the end regardless.
I thought the point of anti-monopoly rules was to allow other, equally good, systems/companies to compete, not to prop up useless 5th rate systems by puishing the ones that actually work.
But how will another system arise to compete and become as good without punishing Google? Will Google remain good if they never have to worry about competition?
I don't really see what the big deal is, either we care about monopolies being bad or we don't - if we do care, action must be taken against them, if we don't then it doesn't. Deciding to leave alone the 'good' monopolies seems like its counter to the idea of monopolies not being good in the long run.
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
I mean, isn't that inherently part of the point of anti-monopoly rules? That in the long run forcing some competition and variety is better, even if in the present doing so would be worse as the monopoly is because one is a lot better than the others? It feels like how benign dictatorship seems like it would probably be quite effective, but inevitably the next one won't be benign.
A lot of industries seem to narrow down to a big two/three/four in the end regardless.
I thought the point of anti-monopoly rules was to allow other, equally good, systems/companies to compete, not to prop up useless 5th rate systems by puishing the ones that actually work.
But how will another system arise to compete and become as good without punishing Google? Will Google remain good if they never have to worry about competition?
I don't really see what the big deal is, either we care about monopolies being bad or we don't - if we do care, action must be taken against them, if we don't then it doesn't. Deciding to leave alone the 'good' monopolies seems like its counter to the idea of monopolies not being good in the long run.
Bing is forced down my throat every time I open Edge. They have a virtual front end monopoly and yet their system is still utterly shit. I don't want to spend 10 or 15 years putting up with a succession of shit search engines because some fuckwits decided Google was too successful and too good at what it did.
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
I remember accidentally stumbling across the Google search engine in either 1998 or 1999 and instantly recognising that it was about a million times better than any other search engine at the time. It's amazing that the situation hasn't significantly changed since then. (The way I realised this was because with all other search engines if you made a slight error with the search it wouldn't know what you were talking about, whereas Google was able to work it out, even back then).
It has changed, Google is way worse. If you want a half-decent search engine nowadays you have to pay for it, for instance use kagi.com.
I've not tried kagi.com. I looked but did not want to open an account just to try it. By default I use Bing but for difficult queries go back to Google. Bing seems to be doing keyword matching on the search string, so if one term dominates, that's all you get back.
I did a bit of work on if the VP helped in their home state and looked at the vote shares of the last 10 new veep candidates, 8 helped and 2 harmed, average of +2.20% and that could maybe make the difference in PA. that being said, the advantage is more in small states than big states and maybe a bit stronger for Republicans than for Democrats.
I did a bit of work on if the VP helped in their home state and looked at the vote shares of the last 10 new veep candidates, 8 helped and 2 harmed, average of +2.20% and that could maybe make the difference in PA. that being said, the advantage is more in small states than big states and maybe a bit stronger for Republicans than for Democrats.
You appear to be neglecting the possibility - actually the actuality - of OTHER factors re: state results cited.
"Liz Truss @trussliz Astonishing a Home Office Minister is excusing masked thugs.
She must retract this statement and the Prime Minister must urgently commit to protect the safety and freedom of everyone in our country.
Quote Jess Phillips @jessphillips · 7h These people came to this location because it has been spread that racists were coming to attack them. This misinformation was spread entirely to create this content. Don't spread it MR Tice! x.com/TiceRichard/st…"
Most alternative search engines are just google with some re-indexing. I haven't heard of Kagi, is this another one of these type of approaches, as crawling the web yourself is a massive and expensive task. Asking people to pay for search, that is a brave business model.
I did a bit of work on if the VP helped in their home state and looked at the vote shares of the last 10 new veep candidates, 8 helped and 2 harmed, average of +2.20% and that could maybe make the difference in PA. that being said, the advantage is more in small states than big states and maybe a bit stronger for Republicans than for Democrats.
You appear to be neglecting the possibility - actually the actuality - of OTHER factors re: state results cited.
Yes, but averages should even them out shouldn't they?
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
Microsoft itself has faced judgements against it for monopoly practices of course
It's almost amusing. Microsoft became widely loathed for building a 'monopoly' that was far, far, far less invasive and far easier to avoid than the situation with the current players. But this time people don't really seem to care.
Google and/or Apple have their claws incising way more deeply into users lives than MS ever did, even at peak antitrust. But they're not Microsoft, so different rules, hey.
I did a bit of work on if the VP helped in their home state and looked at the vote shares of the last 10 new veep candidates, 8 helped and 2 harmed, average of +2.20% and that could maybe make the difference in PA. that being said, the advantage is more in small states than big states and maybe a bit stronger for Republicans than for Democrats.
You appear to be neglecting the possibility - actually the actuality - of OTHER factors re: state results cited.
Yes, but averages should even them out shouldn't they?
Might help, maybe, IF you spelled out (?) you arithmetic. BUT seems to me, that you are attributing the diff between national vote share for party ticket in relevant election compared with previous election, and the state vote shares, ENTIRELY to VP candidate.
"Liz Truss @trussliz Astonishing a Home Office Minister is excusing masked thugs.
She must retract this statement and the Prime Minister must urgently commit to protect the safety and freedom of everyone in our country.
Quote Jess Phillips @jessphillips · 7h These people came to this location because it has been spread that racists were coming to attack them. This misinformation was spread entirely to create this content. Don't spread it MR Tice! x.com/TiceRichard/st…"
Very similar to Donald Trump strategy & tactics re: neo-Nazi violence for example Charlottesville, Proud Boys and (lest we forget) January 2021. INCLUDING the dog-whistling before, during & after.
Yet again Nigel Farage plagerizes the MAGA playbook.
It's bewildering that you can still make 1% profit on Harris as nominee when, as I understand it, she's already been officially selected as the candidate for the Dems.
What's the likelihood of us finishing ahead of the French at these Olympics?
We should do well in the velodrome and there's still maybe one or two golds in the athletics for us plus the odd one here or there. I think we could end at or near 22 golds. I'm not sure the French have got much left in the tank for athletics and their track cycling team isn't as strong as ours, the men's pursuit team finished in 5th in qualifying so they won't even figure for the gold medal matches and it's a fairly good barometer of overall team strength for medals on the track.
What's annoying is that we've been on the wrong side of a bunch of 50/50 gold/silver medals losing golds for hundredths of seconds which is basically random chance at that point. If half of those had gone our way instead of the sort of fifth that we seem to have got we'd be another 3 or 4 gold medals up and we'd be looking at a properly banner games.
France have just lost a squeaker in the 3 man basketball
Sounds even more contrived than triathlon relays. Someone needs to rein in the IOC's creatives.
Flat on VP market again. It's been a great ride (where tbh I have massively over traded but the volatility has been such it was dead easy anyway... much like the financial markets today actually) but evens for both remaining contenders now seeming within my uncertainty bounds.
The winner will be obvious in hindsight of course.
It's bewildering that you can still make 1% profit on Harris as nominee when, as I understand it, she's already been officially selected as the candidate for the Dems.
Sky News is wrong, situation is > Kamala Harris is only candidate who qualified for Democratic nomination > Democratic National Committee has confirmed that KH has secured (more than) enough delegates to win the nomination > However, this is NOT official until the nomination IS officially announced tomorrow, Tuesday.
It's bewildering that you can still make 1% profit on Harris as nominee when, as I understand it, she's already been officially selected as the candidate for the Dems.
Sky News is wrong, situation is > Kamala Harris is only candidate who qualified for Democratic nomination > Democratic National Committee has confirmed that KH has secured (more than) enough delegates to win the nomination > However, this is NOT official until the nomination IS officially announced tomorrow, Tuesday.
Is it Tuesday? Betfair says it will settle at the DNC which is still two weeks off, so it will be that delay which keeps the market in play because 1.01 punters want quick settlement.
It's bewildering that you can still make 1% profit on Harris as nominee when, as I understand it, she's already been officially selected as the candidate for the Dems.
If she say had a medical episode (Please note this is solely for the point of the argument) and pulled out would she have won the nomination ? Is the position legally different to how Biden"s was ? In short should the market be settled or still open ?
Betfair timed the GOP markets for final day of the RNC when Trump accepted the nomination so I expect there's still a wait for the DNC and Harris formally accepting
Was puzzled that France has suddenly gone clear of us in Olympic gold medals when we are in the same time zone, and was looking for a disqualification but of course the surfing is in Tahiti, literally on the other side of the world and happening right now.
It's bewildering that you can still make 1% profit on Harris as nominee when, as I understand it, she's already been officially selected as the candidate for the Dems.
If she say had a medical episode (Please note this is solely for the point of the argument) and pulled out would she have won the nomination ? Is the position legally different to how Biden"s was ? In short should the market be settled or still open ?
Betfair timed the GOP markets for final day of the RNC when Trump accepted the nomination so I expect there's still a wait for the DNC and Harris formally accepting
The Art Of Writing Speeches For The President: Insights from David Frum
David Frum is a political commentator and former speechwriter for President George W. Bush. He worked closely with the White House during pivotal moments in modern American history, such as the Iraq War.
What was it like writing speeches for policies you didn't agree with? Do you think Trump is successful and will win the presidency again? Why did you change your stance on the Iraq War?
Rory and Alastair is [sic] joined by David Frum to answer these questions and much more.
Podcast episode number: 89
00:00 Intro 01:58 Childhood 08:11 Working with George W. Bush 10:48 As a man of the left, what was it like being surrounded by hard right politicians? 14:10 Thoughts on the British Conservative party 17:19 Do you have a sense of nostalgia? 20:50 Why is Trump a success? 28:10 Your advice to Vice President Harris? 32:32 Why did Biden leave it so close to the wire? 35:50 Relationship with J.D. Vance 40:06 Your conservative stance 43:30 What do you think of who J.D. Vance is now? 48:46 Going from supporting America's intervention in Iraq to a critic 54:08 Fear of the war in Ukraine 55:50 The move towards protectionism 58:45 Israel and the Middle East 1:00:48 Your daughter Miranda and grief 1:04:40 Debrief 1:10:40 Outro https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCU9tXeZGYk
It's bewildering that you can still make 1% profit on Harris as nominee when, as I understand it, she's already been officially selected as the candidate for the Dems.
Sky News is wrong, situation is > Kamala Harris is only candidate who qualified for Democratic nomination > Democratic National Committee has confirmed that KH has secured (more than) enough delegates to win the nomination > However, this is NOT official until the nomination IS officially announced tomorrow, Tuesday.
Is it Tuesday? Betfair says it will settle at the DNC which is still two weeks off, so it will be that delay which keeps the market in play because 1.01 punters want quick settlement.
Tuesday, August 6 is day before the Ohio deadline to qualify for ballot. Ohio legislature changed the law and date but new statute does not take affect until September, though this is disputed by some in Ohio, but certainly waiting until AFTER August 7 would guarantee a legal challenge.
AND note that number of other states, including WA, have similar deadlines BEFORE the Democrat National Convention convenes.
So Betfair is acting out of abundance of caution (like DNC) . . . AND also getting the benefit of the float, that is punters' money that much longer in Betfair's coffers.
On the subject of the US election, I just had a look at the Betfair markets for individual states to see what the electoral college would produce if the favourite won each state. Well the markets have Trump winning Arizona, Nevada and Georgia, all the others remaining as they were. That would have given Harris 273 to 265. But they have changed the votes each state gets to reflect th census so it becomes 270 to 268. And this assumes the Nebraska 2nd District (Omaha), which goes its own way, stays with Harris, which is very uncertain as it has been very marginal in recent elections. If it goes to Trump it is 269-269 and that means he wins I think. We need the Wizard to return home do his magic, I am sure the Sage will help him.
Betfair isn't a great guide to what's going on at the moment.
Minnesota has voted for every Democratic candidate since 1976. If Harris is stupid enough to pick Walz over Shapiro, governor of PA ie the key swing state this election, then Trump has just been given a massive get out of jail card after he picked Vance as his VP pick
It's not really clear that the VP candidate helps deliver their state, IIUC it only seems to work if the state is very teensy.
It's an article of faith for HYUFD. You won't persuade him.
Actually, there is nothing surprising about "Liberal Republicans" -- if you know a little American history. The party of Lincoln favored free speech and free men from the beginning. They favored free trade only within the US, but 2.5 out of 3 isn't bad.
The Republican Party generally supports our civil rights laws, and always has. Since WW II, it has been, mostly, a supporter of free trade. NAFTA was proposed by Reagan and negotiated by GHWB. (It was ratified by Bill Clinton, who adhered to the traditional Southern Democratic policies of his youth. At the time, southerners wanted to be able to buy manufactured goods from, for example, the UK, rather than pay the higher prices demanded by northern manufacturers.)
In general, since Reagan, the Republican Party has tended to oppose restrictions on free speech imposed by "campaign finance reform" bills. A couple of decades ago, the ACLU was on their side on that issue -- but that was the old ACLU.
The GOP has changed rather more than tge ACLU. And their determination to remove any real campaign finance restrictions in recent years has had absolutely nothing to do with free speech. Except for very large corporations and billionaires.
Have they missed the fact that Microsoft push you at every opportunity to use the excerable Bing? Can it really be called a monopoly if your competitors version is so shit? Or are they going to force us to use a substandard system just because it is fairer?
I remember accidentally stumbling across the Google search engine in either 1998 or 1999 and instantly recognising that it was about a million times better than any other search engine at the time. It's amazing that the situation hasn't significantly changed since then. (The way I realised this was because with all other search engines if you made a slight error with the search it wouldn't know what you were talking about, whereas Google was able to work it out, even back then).
IMV Google back in ye olden days was *not* massively better than its competitors such as Lycos o Yahoo - at least in terms of its answers.
Google's USP was simple: in the days of dialup, one of the other graphics-heavy 'portal' search engines would sometimes take minutes to load. Google's page was clean, simple, showed what the user needed - a query box - and responded quickly.
This meant that instead of waiting ages for Yahoo to load, I could go to Google and get a couple of answers back. It was such a difference that it was even noticeable at work, on a (for the time) very good Internet link.
Three more leading OpenAI people have left the company...
John Schulman, one of the co-founders of artificial intelligence company OpenAI, has left the ChatGPT maker for rival Anthropic, he said in a post on social media platform X late Monday.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
It's bewildering that you can still make 1% profit on Harris as nominee when, as I understand it, she's already been officially selected as the candidate for the Dems.
Sky News is wrong, situation is > Kamala Harris is only candidate who qualified for Democratic nomination > Democratic National Committee has confirmed that KH has secured (more than) enough delegates to win the nomination > However, this is NOT official until the nomination IS officially announced tomorrow, Tuesday.
I doubt Betfair will pay out until after the Democratic National Convention ends on 22nd August.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
"Liz Truss @trussliz Astonishing a Home Office Minister is excusing masked thugs.
She must retract this statement and the Prime Minister must urgently commit to protect the safety and freedom of everyone in our country.
Quote Jess Phillips @jessphillips · 7h These people came to this location because it has been spread that racists were coming to attack them. This misinformation was spread entirely to create this content. Don't spread it MR Tice! x.com/TiceRichard/st…"
Truss, Jenkyns, Ashworth; why are we hearing so much from electoral rejects?
"Liz Truss @trussliz Astonishing a Home Office Minister is excusing masked thugs.
She must retract this statement and the Prime Minister must urgently commit to protect the safety and freedom of everyone in our country.
Quote Jess Phillips @jessphillips · 7h These people came to this location because it has been spread that racists were coming to attack them. This misinformation was spread entirely to create this content. Don't spread it MR Tice! x.com/TiceRichard/st…"
Truss is right. Starmer's pronouncements seem increasingly odd.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar, but for that conflict it was excellent.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Are the opinion pollsters suddenly reluctant to carry out a voting intention polls?
It's been over a month since the general election and we've had several polls charting the SKS's personal ratings but only one voting intention poll.
What's going on?
Costs money.
Rubbish, they're all asking the question, they're just not publishing the answer.
Evidence for that claim?
The polling company that failed to publish their VI the other day said they were 'working on their methodology' hence not publishing VI - they can't work on their methodology without having the data. What would be the point of any of these pollsters doing surveys and not asking VI?
Are the opinion pollsters suddenly reluctant to carry out a voting intention polls?
It's been over a month since the general election and we've had several polls charting the SKS's personal ratings but only one voting intention poll.
What's going on?
Costs money.
Rubbish, they're all asking the question, they're just not publishing the answer.
Evidence for that claim?
The polling company that failed to publish their VI the other day said they were 'working on their methodology' hence not publishing VI - they can't work on their methodology without having the data. What would be the point of any of these pollsters doing surveys and not asking VI?
I don't think there is a big conspiracy. After previous polling failures, they did something very similar.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, brown people.
Yesterday, it certainly was that mob that were causing trouble, the media had to withdraw as they weren't safe, Sky had their van tyres slashed, cars got attacked, some innocent bloke in the pub got beat up pretty badly.
There are plenty of tweets showing the knuckle draggers from previous days smashing shit up.
As I say, its certainly biased in its focus. Its very pro Ukraine, very pro Israel. That doesn't mean they are spreading fake news, rather a biased view.
Are the opinion pollsters suddenly reluctant to carry out a voting intention polls?
It's been over a month since the general election and we've had several polls charting the SKS's personal ratings but only one voting intention poll.
What's going on?
Costs money.
Rubbish, they're all asking the question, they're just not publishing the answer.
Evidence for that claim?
The polling company that failed to publish their VI the other day said they were 'working on their methodology' hence not publishing VI - they can't work on their methodology without having the data. What would be the point of any of these pollsters doing surveys and not asking VI?
The polling companies did not do well polling for the recent GE. Perhaps, just perhaps, instead of this being a conspiracy, they want to try to get their house and techniques in order before releasing more VI info?
VI involves a lot of corrections and assumptions about the data, as has been discussed on here many times before. Allowances for non-voters, non-responders, biases in samples, etc, etc. They may well be asking VI questions along with things like favourability; but favourability is much easier to process than VI.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
There's plenty of reporting of rioting white people. Why pray did Sky News delete from its website the incidents in Birmingham ?
Ch4 news Alex Thompson deleting his tweets from the previous day was rather odd. He had done some excellent reporting showing the chaotic situation on the ground and had video evidence of a whole host of crimes being committed.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
There's plenty of reporting of rioting white people. Why pray did Sky News delete from its website the incidents in Birmingham ?
We're talking about visegrad's channel.
I'm actually mixed about visegrad's channel. I occasionally read it, and have found ti informative. But there have been a fair few times it has given me genuine wtf! moments.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, brown people.
Yesterday, it certainly was that mob that were causing trouble, the media had to withdraw as they weren't safe, Sky had their van tyres slashed, cars got attacked, some innocent bloke in the pub got beat up pretty badly.
There are plenty of tweets showing the knuckle draggers from previous days smashing shit up.
As I say, its certainly biased in its focus. Its very pro Ukraine, very pro Israel. That doesn't mean they are spreading fake news, rather a biased view.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, brown people.
Yesterday, it certainly was that mob that were causing trouble, the media had to withdraw as they weren't safe, Sky had their van tyres slashed, cars got attacked, some innocent bloke in the pub got beat up pretty badly.
There are plenty of tweets showing the knuckle draggers from previous days smashing shit up.
As I say, its certainly biased in its focus. Its very pro Ukraine, very pro Israel. That doesn't mean they are spreading fake news, rather a biased view.
Again, I am not sure what the issue is here. Jess Phillips tweeted to say that this group had gathered because they heard rumours the EDL were coming and had come out to fight them. And then there was trouble, despite no far right knuckle draggers being anywhere to be seen.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
There's plenty of reporting of rioting white people. Why pray did Sky News delete from its website the incidents in Birmingham ?
Ch4 news Alex Thompson deleting his tweets from the previous day was rather odd. He had done some excellent reporting showing the chaotic situation on the ground and had video evidence of a whole host of crimes being committed.
Whilst Radiogenoa and Visegrad whatever their views are at least semi serious accounts, there is one that to my mind clearly isn't. I think the Barry Stanton account is probably run by someone with centre left views. A ludicrous pastiche of a character like a 1930 Al Murray's (Al Mosley) pub landlord, I bet he barely believes people take him (or her) seriously.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
There's plenty of reporting of rioting white people. Why pray did Sky News delete from its website the incidents in Birmingham ?
Ch4 news Alex Thompson deleting his tweets from the previous day was rather odd. He had done some excellent reporting showing the chaotic situation on the ground and had video evidence of a whole host of crimes being committed.
Whilst Radiogenoa and Visegrad whatever their views are at least semi serious accounts, there is one that to my mind clearly isn't. I think the Barry Stanton account is probably run by someone with centre left views. A ludicrous pastiche of a character like a 1930 Al Murray's (Al Mosley) a pub landlord, I bet he barely believes people take him (or her) seriously.
Visegrad is biased, you could argue bordering on propaganda, Radiogenoa is much more dodgy, that is wall to wall anti-immigrant content. Its like LibsOfTikTok of non-white people doing bad things and often twisted account of what happened.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, brown people.
Yesterday, it certainly was that mob that were causing trouble, the media had to withdraw as they weren't safe, Sky had their van tyres slashed, cars got attacked, some innocent bloke in the pub got beat up pretty badly.
There are plenty of tweets showing the knuckle draggers from previous days smashing shit up.
As I say, its certainly biased in its focus. Its very pro Ukraine, very pro Israel. That doesn't mean they are spreading fake news, rather a biased view.
Again, I am not sure what the issue is here. Jess Phillips tweeted to say that this group had gathered because they heard rumours the EDL were coming and had come out to fight them. And then there was trouble, despite no far right knuckle draggers being anywhere to be seen.
Because it gives the impression that the 'gathering' is the cause of the problem. "Around 400 migrant men have gathered in Birmingham."
And if you want to know why this is a problem; just look at the responses the post got.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
There's plenty of reporting of rioting white people. Why pray did Sky News delete from its website the incidents in Birmingham ?
Ch4 news Alex Thompson deleting his tweets from the previous day was rather odd. He had done some excellent reporting showing the chaotic situation on the ground and had video evidence of a whole host of crimes being committed.
He deleted them probably as he was being attacked for his reporting by people as being ‘right wing’
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
There's plenty of reporting of rioting white people. Why pray did Sky News delete from its website the incidents in Birmingham ?
Ch4 news Alex Thompson deleting his tweets from the previous day was rather odd. He had done some excellent reporting showing the chaotic situation on the ground and had video evidence of a whole host of crimes being committed.
He deleted them probably as he was being attacked for his reporting by people as being ‘right wing’
The LBC journalist who reported being chased by a gang with weapons has also been similarly abused.
Sad if that is why he has done it, as it showed a range of incidents, many of which were criminal. If he has deleted them because a couple out of a whole day worth showed non-white people behaving criminally that is not being a proper journalist.
You can point out criminal behaviour from different people, without making a false equivalence of the intensity and scale.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
The way I see this situation, there are two scenarios that come to mind, both very bad.
1. That Labour succeed in crushing the 'far right' and imposing its essentially 'woke' view of the world through a form of authoritarianism that enough people submit to such that it comprises a workable form of government, something similar to the 'Canada' model.
2. That Labour implode through its instinct to 'support the downtrodden', its sympathy with illegal asylum seekers/violent gangs resulting in popular discontent and loss of legitimacy, and thus leading to a popular and unstoppable 'far right' insurgency, something like the Trump model.
This is why I have been saying that Starmer needs to do more than just 'crush the riots'. The strategy should be broader, otherwise it is a path to hell. The starting point could be to condemn all violence, and apply the same approach to arrest / prosecution to both sides. They need to do this, to show they have moved on from the 'BLM kneeling' phase and to see off the emerging 'two tier keir' critique that is coming from the right.
Are the opinion pollsters suddenly reluctant to carry out a voting intention polls?
It's been over a month since the general election and we've had several polls charting the SKS's personal ratings but only one voting intention poll.
What's going on?
Costs money.
Rubbish, they're all asking the question, they're just not publishing the answer.
Evidence for that claim?
The polling company that failed to publish their VI the other day said they were 'working on their methodology' hence not publishing VI - they can't work on their methodology without having the data. What would be the point of any of these pollsters doing surveys and not asking VI?
I don't think there is a big conspiracy. After previous polling failures, they did something very similar.
I didn't say there was a conspiracy. Personally though I think they should release VI and let people extrapolate.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
In the deleted Sky video they,literally ran up to the journalist shouting ‘Free Palestine’. Course they were pro Palestine.
???
The 'rioters' are the right-wing @sshats who are gathering to attack immigrants on the basis of a non-immigrant killing some schoolchildren. If those @sshats went away, there wouldn't be the current problems.
Simples.
(I felt the same way about the BLM and other riots/gatherings; the problem is more the original violent protests than the counter-protests.
What we're seeing here are immigrants being attacked, and people pointing at videos of gatherings of ethnic minorities and insinuating "See! They're the ones rioting! They're the ones causing the problems!"
Harris is ahead in both the RCP averages (head to head and 5 ways) this morning for the first time. The lead is not yet significant but the trend continues to be in her favour. This is a big day for her with the announcement of her VP candidate. She needs to keep that momentum going. At the moment she is not leading by as much as Hilary did when she lost the EC.
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
"Musk also replies to the likes of @visegrad24 and @radiogenoa - similar accounts spreading racist bigotry."
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
Visegrad24 is well-dodgy, and is known to spread disinformation.
The examples cited in the criticism of them / their disinformation seem kinda of laughable, some story about Leonardo DiCaprio donating money that turned out to be untrue. They are certainly biased, but on Ukraine / Russia, I have never seen anything that turned out to be untrue and often way ahead of the game reporting on what has been going on, they certainly not posting in what we are talking about these dodgy twitter accounts posting fake names of people who have stabbed kids in Southport style.
I've noticed that it can be quite an odd channel at times, as if there are at least two people running it at times (which is fine), but they don't talk to each other.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses... https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
I am struggling to see what is wrong with the first one. Part of that group ran up to Sky News reporter and were banging on about Free Palestine.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar.
Because if you are trying to show what is going on in a riot, you might actually want to show rioters.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
There's plenty of reporting of rioting white people. Why pray did Sky News delete from its website the incidents in Birmingham ?
Ch4 news Alex Thompson deleting his tweets from the previous day was rather odd. He had done some excellent reporting showing the chaotic situation on the ground and had video evidence of a whole host of crimes being committed.
He deleted them probably as he was being attacked for his reporting by people as being ‘right wing’
The LBC journalist who reported being chased by a gang with weapons has also been similarly abused.
Sad if that is why he has done it, as it showed a range of incidents, many of which were criminal. If he has deleted them because a couple out of a whole day worth showed non-white people behaving criminally that is not being a proper journalist.
You can point out criminal behaviour from different people, without making a false equivalence of the intensity and scale.
We don’t know why he deleted them. (Some here have speculated as to why, but I don’t see any evidence.)
The way I see this situation, there are two scenarios that come to mind, both very bad.
1. That Labour succeed in crushing the 'far right' and imposing its essentially 'woke' view of the world through a form of authoritarianism that enough people submit to such that it comprises a workable form of government, something similar to the 'Canada' model.
2. That Labour implode through its instinct to 'support the downtrodden', its sympathy with illegal asylum seekers/violent gangs resulting in popular discontent and loss of legitimacy, and thus leading to a popular and unstoppable 'far right' insurgency, something like the Trump model.
This is why I have been saying that Starmer needs to do more than just 'crush the riots'. The strategy should be broader, otherwise it is a path to hell. The starting point could be to condemn all violence, and apply the same approach to arrest / prosecution to both sides. They need to do this, to show they have moved on from the 'BLM kneeling' phase and to see off the emerging 'two tier keir' critique that is coming from the right.
This is one of the more ridiculous posts from recent days on PB (and there’s been competition).
Walz would be the safest choice for Harris . Unlikely to annoy the progressives in the party. I think she’ll go for Shapiro who has more star quality but a bit more controversial .
Comments
Hopefully the weather will turn unsettled soon... You never get riots in the cold and wet and sleet and fog of January lol! 😂
If rumours are true and Harris has rejected Shapiro that may well tip the state to Trump, with it the EC and the Presidency!
https://x.com/ScottPresler/status/1820465023015428458
In 1960 LBJ certainly delivered Texas for JFK, he likely would have lost the state otherwise (which was also incumbent President IKE's birthplace and Nixon was his VP)
The Asylum Seeker loving, pensioner hating corrupt, surrender-monkey Labour Party.
or
Those incredibly brave, Britain loving patriots, the Reform Party.
A lot of industries seem to narrow down to a big two/three/four in the end regardless.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp.#:~:text=On April 3, 2000, Jackson,of Microsoft as its remedy.
Democracy not so much.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/asylum-seeker-labour-migrants-v2tnwp5tp
If not, or if it is so close it makes little difference, then it's just a case of going all in on Harris and Kamalamentum.
One flaw though, how about promptly sending those that arent genuinely under threat back home.
(Answer is NOT shoe size.)
And, especially after the Civil War, there were politicians who called themselves Liberal Republicans, notably in 1872: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Republican_Party_(United_States)
Then there are later figures, such as Jacob Javits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_Javits
The Republican Party generally supports our civil rights laws, and always has. Since WW II, it has been, mostly, a supporter of free trade. NAFTA was proposed by Reagan and negotiated by GHWB. (It was ratified by Bill Clinton, who adhered to the traditional Southern Democratic policies of his youth. At the time, southerners wanted to be able to buy manufactured goods from, for example, the UK, rather than pay the higher prices demanded by northern manufacturers.)
In general, since Reagan, the Republican Party has tended to oppose restrictions on free speech imposed by "campaign finance reform" bills. A couple of decades ago, the ACLU was on their side on that issue -- but that was the old ACLU.
For example, Richard Nixon re: Spiro Agnew; and John McCann re: Sarah Palin.
Though worth noting that in other cases, POTUS nominees have erred perhaps, by selecting a running mate with whom they were TOO damn comfortable.
For example, George Bush the Elder re: Dan Quayle; and possibly Donald Trump re: JD Vance.
I don't really see what the big deal is, either we care about monopolies being bad or we don't - if we do care, action must be taken against them, if we don't then it doesn't. Deciding to leave alone the 'good' monopolies seems like its counter to the idea of monopolies not being good in the long run.
https://x.com/trussliz/status/1820561675809866139
"Liz Truss
@trussliz
Astonishing a Home Office Minister is excusing masked thugs.
She must retract this statement and the Prime Minister must urgently commit to protect the safety and freedom of everyone in our country.
Quote
Jess Phillips
@jessphillips
·
7h
These people came to this location because it has been spread that racists were coming to attack them. This misinformation was spread entirely to create this content. Don't spread it MR Tice! x.com/TiceRichard/st…"
Google and/or Apple have their claws incising way more deeply into users lives than MS ever did, even at peak antitrust. But they're not Microsoft, so different rules, hey.
Don't think that's entirely valid.
Yet again Nigel Farage plagerizes the MAGA playbook.
Only partly pooh-poohing!
Certainly people will make that argument, even IF she loosed by 100,000 . . . which she AIN'T gonna do!
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.178163685
https://news.sky.com/story/kamala-harris-officially-declared-democratic-party-candidate-13186256
The winner will be obvious in hindsight of course.
> Kamala Harris is only candidate who qualified for Democratic nomination
> Democratic National Committee has confirmed that KH has secured (more than) enough delegates to win the nomination
> However, this is NOT official until the nomination IS officially announced tomorrow, Tuesday.
Is the position legally different to how Biden"s was ?
In short should the market be settled or still open ?
Betfair timed the GOP markets for final day of the RNC when Trump accepted the nomination so I expect there's still a wait for the DNC and Harris formally accepting
No.
Still open.
Correct.
David Frum is a political commentator and former speechwriter for President George W. Bush. He worked closely with the White House during pivotal moments in modern American history, such as the Iraq War.
What was it like writing speeches for policies you didn't agree with? Do you think Trump is successful and will win the presidency again? Why did you change your stance on the Iraq War?
Rory and Alastair is [sic] joined by David Frum to answer these questions and much more.
Podcast episode number: 89
00:00 Intro
01:58 Childhood
08:11 Working with George W. Bush
10:48 As a man of the left, what was it like being surrounded by hard right politicians?
14:10 Thoughts on the British Conservative party
17:19 Do you have a sense of nostalgia?
20:50 Why is Trump a success?
28:10 Your advice to Vice President Harris?
32:32 Why did Biden leave it so close to the wire?
35:50 Relationship with J.D. Vance
40:06 Your conservative stance
43:30 What do you think of who J.D. Vance is now?
48:46 Going from supporting America's intervention in Iraq to a critic
54:08 Fear of the war in Ukraine
55:50 The move towards protectionism
58:45 Israel and the Middle East
1:00:48 Your daughter Miranda and grief
1:04:40 Debrief
1:10:40 Outro
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCU9tXeZGYk
AND note that number of other states, including WA, have similar deadlines BEFORE the Democrat National Convention convenes.
So Betfair is acting out of abundance of caution (like DNC) . . . AND also getting the benefit of the float, that is punters' money that much longer in Betfair's coffers.
And their determination to remove any real campaign finance restrictions in recent years has had absolutely nothing to do with free speech. Except for very large corporations and billionaires.
Google's USP was simple: in the days of dialup, one of the other graphics-heavy 'portal' search engines would sometimes take minutes to load. Google's page was clean, simple, showed what the user needed - a query box - and responded quickly.
This meant that instead of waiting ages for Yahoo to load, I could go to Google and get a couple of answers back. It was such a difference that it was even noticeable at work, on a (for the time) very good Internet link.
John Schulman, one of the co-founders of artificial intelligence company OpenAI, has left the ChatGPT maker for rival Anthropic, he said in a post on social media platform X late Monday.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/openai-co-founder-john-schulman-024502555.html?guccounter=1
Suggests that perhaps not a happy camp losing so many top people when you are the biggest name in tech (Anthropic's LLM is better IMO).
"1/ It's insane that @Elonmusk replied to @europeinvasionn's tweet about UK riots. The account EuropeInvasionn, as I have stated many times now, is an influence operation. It's a hijacked X account that exclusively deals in anti-migrant & anti-Muslim great replacement disinfo"
https://x.com/marcowenjones/status/1820521394134016197
The guy is wrong about visegrad24. That is one of the most reliable well informed accounts in terms of coverage of Ukraine / Russia war and the people behind it are known figures. The main guy is a British / Polish guy, not some anonymous bot account.
The following tweet of theirs is an interesting one, because it *may* be true, but is also kinda not the point as the rioters were not pro-Palestinians. And look at the responses...
https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820566268006801899
Or this one:
https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820510381040681377
Concentrating on the people the rioters are complaining about, rather than the rioters themselves, is odd.
The account is certainly biased, but that's not the same as spreader of fake news. To be honest, I don't look at it that much now Ukraine / Russia has dropped off the radar, but for that conflict it was excellent.
I'm no fan of the pro-Palestine mob, but their direct relevance to what's happened in the last few days is zero. Yet to anyone looking at visegrad's channel would think that the riots were fuelled by immigrants and fans of immigrants. There are no pictures of rioting Brits, just of, oddly enough, ethnic minorities.
As another example, this one:
https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820464940777713717
There are plenty of tweets showing the knuckle draggers from previous days smashing shit up.
https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820122320587067821
https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820084971618619623
As I say, its certainly biased in its focus. Its very pro Ukraine, very pro Israel. That doesn't mean they are spreading fake news, rather a biased view.
VI involves a lot of corrections and assumptions about the data, as has been discussed on here many times before. Allowances for non-voters, non-responders, biases in samples, etc, etc. They may well be asking VI questions along with things like favourability; but favourability is much easier to process than VI.
Not everything is a conspiracy.
I'm actually mixed about visegrad's channel. I occasionally read it, and have found ti informative. But there have been a fair few times it has given me genuine wtf! moments.
https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1820510381040681377
I think the Barry Stanton account is probably run by someone with centre left views. A ludicrous pastiche of a character like a 1930 Al Murray's (Al Mosley) pub landlord, I bet he barely believes people take him (or her) seriously.
"Around 400 migrant men have gathered in Birmingham."
And if you want to know why this is a problem; just look at the responses the post got.
They know it will get those sort of responses.
https://x.com/beardedgenius/status/1820170356037935402?s=61
The LBC journalist who reported being chased by a gang with weapons has also been similarly abused.
You can point out criminal behaviour from different people, without making a false equivalence of the intensity and scale.
1. That Labour succeed in crushing the 'far right' and imposing its essentially 'woke' view of the world through a form of authoritarianism that enough people submit to such that it comprises a workable form of government, something similar to the 'Canada' model.
2. That Labour implode through its instinct to 'support the downtrodden', its sympathy with illegal asylum seekers/violent gangs resulting in popular discontent and loss of legitimacy, and thus leading to a popular and unstoppable 'far right' insurgency, something like the Trump model.
This is why I have been saying that Starmer needs to do more than just 'crush the riots'. The strategy should be broader, otherwise it is a path to hell. The starting point could be to condemn all violence, and apply the same approach to arrest / prosecution to both sides. They need to do this, to show they have moved on from the 'BLM kneeling' phase and to see off the emerging 'two tier keir' critique that is coming from the right.
The 'rioters' are the right-wing @sshats who are gathering to attack immigrants on the basis of a non-immigrant killing some schoolchildren. If those @sshats went away, there wouldn't be the current problems.
Simples.
(I felt the same way about the BLM and other riots/gatherings; the problem is more the original violent protests than the counter-protests.
https://x.com/VolodyaTretyak/status/1820535760132690051
Engineering genius; political imbecile.
Trump hikes Mar-a-Lago membership to $1m, raising concerns of selling access
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/05/trump-mar-a-lago-membership-price-hike
Once he loses, there won't be many takers.
Anyone paying now is a fool.
NEW THREAD