Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
Nothing to stop landlords going for an "asking price" at least 20% over what they would actually accept. There will be people deseprate enough to make an offer mid way.
How do Labour plan to win the battle of mid way?
Rent controls don’t work. Who knew?
This Labour government does look to be politically tone deaf. Early days, but the memories of how bad the Tories were are fading faster than anybody thoight possible.
"At least the Tories never did [insert x y or z]"
I was discussing this with my wife the other day saying I had strong buyers remorse for voting labour.
She did point out the Tories were awful, and she is right.
Also she pointed out I did not really want to risk a REform MP, although I do not get triggered by Reform as much as most here.
I think your point is good though.
In a political discussion, you can always make the point that "Only 20% of registered voters actually voted for Labour you know." Then hope those listening assume you were in the 80%...
I used to smugly tell people that I voted for chaos with Ed Miliband. Now that he's actually in government, I might have to keep that quiet
Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
Nothing to stop landlords going for an "asking price" at least 20% over what they would actually accept. There will be people deseprate enough to make an offer mid way.
How do Labour plan to win the battle of mid way?
Rent controls don’t work. Who knew?
This Labour government does look to be politically tone deaf. Early days, but the memories of how bad the Tories were are fading faster than anybody thoight possible.
"At least the Tories never did [insert x y or z]"
I was discussing this with my wife the other day saying I had strong buyers remorse for voting labour.
She did point out the Tories were awful, and she is right.
Also she pointed out I did not really want to risk a REform MP, although I do not get triggered by Reform as much as most here.
I think your point is good though.
Buyer's remorse is really only meaningful if you have chosen to buy, in this case Labour, when a better option was available and now isn't. (Brexit and the form of Brexit we have chosen are pretty exact examples).
Voting Labour isn't really, as only two principal parties of government were available, and the other one was the Tories.
Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
It is similar to the issue with rent caps. They end up increasing rents more rapidly than if they weren't there. Because it is more difficult to increase rents on existing tenants, landlords use the opportunity between tenancies to hike rents more than they would otherwise do, future proofing them. So tenants end up paying more than they otherwise would right from the start of the tenancy. This is exactly what we saw in Scotland with rent increases during the recent rent cap being almost twice that of the rest of the country.
JFDI, as with all the other infrastructure projects. If it needs private finance, then take the private finance.
That's the thing we seem to have forgotten over the past 15 years - it's infrastructure projects that generate growth because it allows people better options that didn't exist before.
Frankly the infrastructure of many Northern Cities make Sofia look like a better place to do business
Absolutely. Watching from somewhere where infrastructure just bloody happens, it’s immensely frustrating to see way more time spent on discussion than execution. JFDI.
I refer to my old anecdote from a decade ago, that Dubai Airport built their Terminal 3 in the same time as Heathrow Terminal 5’s planning inquiry. Same project scope, new buildings on an existing airfield, with no external construction except for the access roads. Why does the UK spend half a decade talking about a new terminal building at an existing airport? JFDI.
Heathrow 3rd runway proposal was started by the govt in 2006. To be fair that is quite quick compared to us taking 20 years of planning simply to update our train timetables in 2018 and still creating chaos for several months.
2006. So 18 years and counting, still without a spade in the ground.
Want to know what Dubai looked like 18 years ago, compared to today?
As a country you need to be on top of national infrastructure, and pay off everyone who gets in the way of it. It’s the single biggest determinant of economic growth.
Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
Nothing to stop landlords going for an "asking price" at least 20% over what they would actually accept. There will be people deseprate enough to make an offer mid way.
How do Labour plan to win the battle of mid way?
Rent controls don’t work. Who knew?
This Labour government does look to be politically tone deaf. Early days, but the memories of how bad the Tories were are fading faster than anybody thoight possible.
"At least the Tories never did [insert x y or z]"
I was discussing this with my wife the other day saying I had strong buyers remorse for voting labour.
She did point out the Tories were awful, and she is right.
Also she pointed out I did not really want to risk a REform MP, although I do not get triggered by Reform as much as most here.
I think your point is good though.
In a political discussion, you can always make the point that "Only 20% of registered voters actually voted for Labour you know." Then hope those listening assume you were in the 80%...
I met up with a couple of friends who voted Reform. I kept quiet and they assumed I had done likewise.
For even more context, this was 1 in 6 of every child in the 'church'.
Another data point in my "Wherever you have religion, you will have abuse by members of that religion, using the religion for cover."
At which point some people screech "Not my religion!"; showing that *they*, if not abusers themselves, are part of the problem.
Joe Rogan has a good theory that the reason the Catholic Church told priests to be celibate, is that they were the original community rock stars who spent their lives chasing women.
Of course, asking them to be celibate has shown to attract a different type of pervert instead, but it’s not a totally bonkers theory as to why it happened.
It may sound like a good theory but it isn't correct. In fact, clerical celibacy was a comparatively late development, only being enforced in Western Europe from the twelfth century onwards as a point of difference with the Orthodox Church on a stricter interpretation of Paul's teachings.
And more pertinently, since it led to a massive upsurge of promiscuity among clergy who could no longer legally marry, it takes the facts backwards.
Trump won the first debate with Biden but lost the second debate with Harris. That record is better for him than 2016 or 2020 when he lost all 3 debates with Hillary and Biden.
Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
Nothing to stop landlords going for an "asking price" at least 20% over what they would actually accept. There will be people deseprate enough to make an offer mid way.
How do Labour plan to win the battle of mid way?
Rent controls don’t work. Who knew?
This Labour government does look to be politically tone deaf. Early days, but the memories of how bad the Tories were are fading faster than anybody thoight possible.
"At least the Tories never did [insert x y or z]"
I was discussing this with my wife the other day saying I had strong buyers remorse for voting labour.
She did point out the Tories were awful, and she is right.
Also she pointed out I did not really want to risk a REform MP, although I do not get triggered by Reform as much as most here.
I think your point is good though.
In a political discussion, you can always make the point that "Only 20% of registered voters actually voted for Labour you know." Then hope those listening assume you were in the 80%...
I used to smugly tell people that I voted for chaos with Ed Miliband. Now that he's actually in government, I might have to keep that quiet
Why are journalists not asking him at every opportunity, just how much he thinks energy prices need to rise to effect his Net Zero agenda?
Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
Nothing to stop landlords going for an "asking price" at least 20% over what they would actually accept. There will be people deseprate enough to make an offer mid way.
How do Labour plan to win the battle of mid way?
Rent controls don’t work. Who knew?
This Labour government does look to be politically tone deaf. Early days, but the memories of how bad the Tories were are fading faster than anybody thoight possible.
"At least the Tories never did [insert x y or z]"
I was discussing this with my wife the other day saying I had strong buyers remorse for voting labour.
She did point out the Tories were awful, and she is right.
Also she pointed out I did not really want to risk a REform MP, although I do not get triggered by Reform as much as most here.
I think your point is good though.
In a political discussion, you can always make the point that "Only 20% of registered voters actually voted for Labour you know." Then hope those listening assume you were in the 80%...
I think roughly 14% of registered electors were keen enough on the government to vote for them, and it is reasonable to suppose that a large proportion voted Tory on personal grounds, because they always do, to keep Reform out etc rather than because they wanted them to carry on. Which means it is reasonable to speculate that about 90% of the population felt that the Tories had delighted us for long enough and it was time for a change.
Off topic, but I have been watching some of the maiden speeches. Nearly all the new MPs can talk well, but the traditional requirements of the maiden speech render most of them as dull as ditch water and with very poor jokes.
Now I have only watched a small subset of them but two do stand out and both were done without notes:
Nigel Farage (Reform) - No matter what you think of him (and in my case not a lot) he can speak. He is excellent.
Chris Coghlan (LD) - His speech was brilliant. He was terribly nervous, but it was one of the most moving speeches I have ever heard. As I have mentioned before he is an MP to watch out for as he also has an excellent CV reminiscent of Paddy Ashdown. I recommend watching it and stick to it to the end for the full impact.
What is notable about these two is I can remember what both of them were talking about. I can't for any of the others.
For even more context, this was 1 in 6 of every child in the 'church'.
Another data point in my "Wherever you have religion, you will have abuse by members of that religion, using the religion for cover."
At which point some people screech "Not my religion!"; showing that *they*, if not abusers themselves, are part of the problem.
Joe Rogan has a good theory that the reason the Catholic Church told priests to be celibate, is that they were the original community rock stars who spent their lives chasing women.
Of course, asking them to be celibate has shown to attract a different type of pervert instead, but it’s not a totally bonkers theory as to why it happened.
It may sound like a good theory but it isn't correct. In fact, clerical celibacy was a comparatively late development, only being enforced in Western Europe from the twelfth century onwards as a point of difference with the Orthodox Church on a stricter interpretation of Paul's teachings.
And more pertinently, since it led to a massive upsurge of promiscuity among clergy who could no longer legally marry, it takes the facts backwards.
Joe Rogan talking out of his arse? Surely not
Just Rogan josh-ing....
I thought that a driver was that clergy families were becoming very rich and powerful - using the Church as hereditary career path?
JFDI, as with all the other infrastructure projects. If it needs private finance, then take the private finance.
That's the thing we seem to have forgotten over the past 15 years - it's infrastructure projects that generate growth because it allows people better options that didn't exist before.
Frankly the infrastructure of many Northern Cities make Sofia look like a better place to do business
Absolutely. Watching from somewhere where infrastructure just bloody happens, it’s immensely frustrating to see way more time spent on discussion than execution. JFDI.
I refer to my old anecdote from a decade ago, that Dubai Airport built their Terminal 3 in the same time as Heathrow Terminal 5’s planning inquiry. Same project scope, new buildings on an existing airfield, with no external construction except for the access roads. Why does the UK spend half a decade talking about a new terminal building at an existing airport? JFDI.
Heathrow 3rd runway proposal was started by the govt in 2006. To be fair that is quite quick compared to us taking 20 years of planning simply to update our train timetables in 2018 and still creating chaos for several months.
Older PBers will recall the Roskill commission on the siting of a the third London Airport, which sat from 1968 and reported as recently as January 1971. Anyone know how it is faring?
Everyone except the Tories picking up support (in England at least). Will a new leader change that dynamic ?
If not, a Reform/LibDem/Green coalition which brings in PR would be a wild possibility...
Nigel Farage and Caroline Lucas reprising the Cameron/Clegg rose garden moment.
Not exactly. It would be a grouping based around the one policy they have in common - PR. And there'd be another election as soon as it was possible to do so under the new arrangements.
It seems extremely unlikely, but is it impossible ?
Swing of 2.5% from Labour to the Tories already then since the GE and the Tories have not even elected their new leader yet.
LDs and Reform also up
Well, yes, but a swing procured by standing still when the new government is making unpopular decisions in a less than competent manner isn't much of a swing.
JFDI, as with all the other infrastructure projects. If it needs private finance, then take the private finance.
Strong agreement. I feel that at this point to do this one is going to politically need some way to label it as "definitely not HS2", unfortunately - both Labour and Tories having come down against HS2 by that name at this point. Maybe this plan can be dressed up that way...
For even more context, this was 1 in 6 of every child in the 'church'.
Another data point in my "Wherever you have religion, you will have abuse by members of that religion, using the religion for cover."
At which point some people screech "Not my religion!"; showing that *they*, if not abusers themselves, are part of the problem.
Joe Rogan has a good theory that the reason the Catholic Church told priests to be celibate, is that they were the original community rock stars who spent their lives chasing women.
Of course, asking them to be celibate has shown to attract a different type of pervert instead, but it’s not a totally bonkers theory as to why it happened.
It may sound like a good theory but it isn't correct. In fact, clerical celibacy was a comparatively late development, only being enforced in Western Europe from the twelfth century onwards as a point of difference with the Orthodox Church on a stricter interpretation of Paul's teachings.
And more pertinently, since it led to a massive upsurge of promiscuity among clergy who could no longer legally marry, it takes the facts backwards.
JFDI, as with all the other infrastructure projects. If it needs private finance, then take the private finance.
That's the thing we seem to have forgotten over the past 15 years - it's infrastructure projects that generate growth because it allows people better options that didn't exist before.
Frankly the infrastructure of many Northern Cities make Sofia look like a better place to do business
Absolutely. Watching from somewhere where infrastructure just bloody happens, it’s immensely frustrating to see way more time spent on discussion than execution. JFDI.
I refer to my old anecdote from a decade ago, that Dubai Airport built their Terminal 3 in the same time as Heathrow Terminal 5’s planning inquiry. Same project scope, new buildings on an existing airfield, with no external construction except for the access roads. Why does the UK spend half a decade talking about a new terminal building at an existing airport? JFDI.
Heathrow 3rd runway proposal was started by the govt in 2006. To be fair that is quite quick compared to us taking 20 years of planning simply to update our train timetables in 2018 and still creating chaos for several months.
2006. So 18 years and counting, still without a spade in the ground.
Want to know what Dubai looked like 18 years ago, compared to today?
As a country you need to be on top of national infrastructure, and pay off everyone who gets in the way of it. It’s the single biggest determinant of economic growth.
It certainly helps to be in a sparsly populated desert wasteland with no pretence of democracy or equal rights.
Swing of 2.5% from Labour to the Tories already then since the GE and the Tories have not even elected their new leader yet.
LDs and Reform also up
Well, yes, but a swing procured by standing still when the new government is making unpopular decisions in a less than competent manner isn't much of a swing.
As swingers go, Stringfellow it ain't.
Yep, Labour will be pretty happy with that poll. Making tough decisions, getting whining and moaning at them every day, press up in arms.
Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
Nothing to stop landlords going for an "asking price" at least 20% over what they would actually accept. There will be people deseprate enough to make an offer mid way.
How do Labour plan to win the battle of mid way?
Rent controls don’t work. Who knew?
This Labour government does look to be politically tone deaf. Early days, but the memories of how bad the Tories were are fading faster than anybody thoight possible.
"At least the Tories never did [insert x y or z]"
I was discussing this with my wife the other day saying I had strong buyers remorse for voting labour.
She did point out the Tories were awful, and she is right.
Also she pointed out I did not really want to risk a REform MP, although I do not get triggered by Reform as much as most here.
I think your point is good though.
In a political discussion, you can always make the point that "Only 20% of registered voters actually voted for Labour you know." Then hope those listening assume you were in the 80%...
I used to smugly tell people that I voted for chaos with Ed Miliband. Now that he's actually in government, I might have to keep that quiet
Why are journalists not asking him at every opportunity, just how much he thinks energy prices need to rise to effect his Net Zero agenda?
If we want net zero, we want two things:
1) Oil and gas prices to rise substantially;
2) The cost of electricity from renewables to crater so they become the cheaper and more secure option.
The fact is, both are already happening due to factors beyond our control. A smart government would be pushing hard to build tidal, wind, hydro and solar (possibly also nuclear) on a grand scale.
Unfortunately, with successive governments that's been a mixed success. We've had an over dependence on gas instead, which is suboptimal economically in the long term even if logical in the short term.
Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
Nothing to stop landlords going for an "asking price" at least 20% over what they would actually accept. There will be people deseprate enough to make an offer mid way.
How do Labour plan to win the battle of mid way?
Rent controls don’t work. Who knew?
This Labour government does look to be politically tone deaf. Early days, but the memories of how bad the Tories were are fading faster than anybody thoight possible.
"At least the Tories never did [insert x y or z]"
I was discussing this with my wife the other day saying I had strong buyers remorse for voting labour.
She did point out the Tories were awful, and she is right.
Also she pointed out I did not really want to risk a REform MP, although I do not get triggered by Reform as much as most here.
I think your point is good though.
In a political discussion, you can always make the point that "Only 20% of registered voters actually voted for Labour you know." Then hope those listening assume you were in the 80%...
I used to smugly tell people that I voted for chaos with Ed Miliband. Now that he's actually in government, I might have to keep that quiet
Why are journalists not asking him at every opportunity, just how much he thinks energy prices need to rise to effect his Net Zero agenda?
If we want net zero, we want two things:
1) Oil and gas prices to rise substantially;
2) The cost of electricity from renewables to crater so they become the cheaper and more secure option.
The fact is, both are already happening due to factors beyond our control. A smart government would be pushing hard to build tidal, wind, hydro and solar (possibly also nuclear) on a grand scale.
Unfortunately, with successive governments that's been a mixed success. We've had an over dependence on gas instead, which is suboptimal economically in the long term even if logical in the short term.
I note that we are spending £500m keeping British Steel going while not giving Rolls Royce the money they need to be a player in the mini nuclear power station market.
Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
Nothing to stop landlords going for an "asking price" at least 20% over what they would actually accept. There will be people deseprate enough to make an offer mid way.
How do Labour plan to win the battle of mid way?
Rent controls don’t work. Who knew?
This Labour government does look to be politically tone deaf. Early days, but the memories of how bad the Tories were are fading faster than anybody thoight possible.
"At least the Tories never did [insert x y or z]"
I was discussing this with my wife the other day saying I had strong buyers remorse for voting labour.
She did point out the Tories were awful, and she is right.
Also she pointed out I did not really want to risk a REform MP, although I do not get triggered by Reform as much as most here.
I think your point is good though.
In a political discussion, you can always make the point that "Only 20% of registered voters actually voted for Labour you know." Then hope those listening assume you were in the 80%...
I used to smugly tell people that I voted for chaos with Ed Miliband. Now that he's actually in government, I might have to keep that quiet
Why are journalists not asking him at every opportunity, just how much he thinks energy prices need to rise to effect his Net Zero agenda?
If we want net zero, we want two things:
1) Oil and gas prices to rise substantially;
2) The cost of electricity from renewables to crater so they become the cheaper and more secure option.
The fact is, both are already happening due to factors beyond our control. A smart government would be pushing hard to build tidal, wind, hydro and solar (possibly also nuclear) on a grand scale.
Unfortunately, with successive governments that's been a mixed success. We've had an over dependence on gas instead, which is suboptimal economically in the long term even if logical in the short term.
Yes, Miliband is absolutely looking to lock in the current high energy prices for the long term.
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
OT PB authors might be interested in The Rest is Entertainment's 25-minute segment with Richard Osman discussing book launches, bestsellers and the publishing industry generally. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOoiDxL4Nqw&t=1410s
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
For even more context, this was 1 in 6 of every child in the 'church'.
Another data point in my "Wherever you have religion, you will have abuse by members of that religion, using the religion for cover."
At which point some people screech "Not my religion!"; showing that *they*, if not abusers themselves, are part of the problem.
Joe Rogan has a good theory that the reason the Catholic Church told priests to be celibate, is that they were the original community rock stars who spent their lives chasing women.
Of course, asking them to be celibate has shown to attract a different type of pervert instead, but it’s not a totally bonkers theory as to why it happened.
It may sound like a good theory but it isn't correct. In fact, clerical celibacy was a comparatively late development, only being enforced in Western Europe from the twelfth century onwards as a point of difference with the Orthodox Church on a stricter interpretation of Paul's teachings.
And more pertinently, since it led to a massive upsurge of promiscuity among clergy who could no longer legally marry, it takes the facts backwards.
Joe Rogan talking out of his arse? Surely not
Just Rogan josh-ing....
I thought that a driver was that clergy families were becoming very rich and powerful - using the Church as hereditary career path?
Aristos and landowners wanted some of that, too, so supported the doctrine, on the logic that they could get control but little Willie who got the gig couldn't legally sire his own lineage presumably ...?
Continued almost into living memory in the C of E, only the vicars were allowed to marry so they got both sides of the cake. Many a parish where the landowner gave the job of rector to his son/nephew. Or even they were one and the same 'squarson'.
JFDI, as with all the other infrastructure projects. If it needs private finance, then take the private finance.
That's the thing we seem to have forgotten over the past 15 years - it's infrastructure projects that generate growth because it allows people better options that didn't exist before.
Frankly the infrastructure of many Northern Cities make Sofia look like a better place to do business
Absolutely. Watching from somewhere where infrastructure just bloody happens, it’s immensely frustrating to see way more time spent on discussion than execution. JFDI.
I refer to my old anecdote from a decade ago, that Dubai Airport built their Terminal 3 in the same time as Heathrow Terminal 5’s planning inquiry. Same project scope, new buildings on an existing airfield, with no external construction except for the access roads. Why does the UK spend half a decade talking about a new terminal building at an existing airport? JFDI.
Heathrow 3rd runway proposal was started by the govt in 2006. To be fair that is quite quick compared to us taking 20 years of planning simply to update our train timetables in 2018 and still creating chaos for several months.
2006. So 18 years and counting, still without a spade in the ground.
Want to know what Dubai looked like 18 years ago, compared to today?
As a country you need to be on top of national infrastructure, and pay off everyone who gets in the way of it. It’s the single biggest determinant of economic growth.
It certainly helps to be in a sparsly populated desert wasteland with no pretence of democracy or equal rights.
So much of the UK is also sparsely populated, such as the HS2 route or the Stonehenge Tunnel route.
The problem is allowing small groups of activists who will campaign against everything, an outsized platform in which to express their opinion against the expressed will of the majority.
Parliament should pass “Heathrow Runway #3 Act”, and the bulldozers should be there the following week, building it.
Trump - as I called - has totally lost his shit and will now sink his own campaign. Whilst the perception was that "45%" would vote for him whatever he said, that's already demonstrably not the case.
Republicans for Harris is a real thing, and its starting to gather momentum. The more that name conservatives declare for the conservative candidate, the more that conservative voters will follow.
Trump will be left with the radicals, the deranged, satan-following evangelicals and the remaining gas-breathing drones. The election is over. Only question now is how big she wins.
Blimey. Wish I had a tenth of your confidence on this one.
My confidence is built on 2 things: 1. Trust in Trump to completely fall apart. That is now happening before our eyes 2. Confidence that Harris will look like the sane choice, even for moderate republicans
There is this obsession with patriotism in America which boggles the mind. But it is a trip wire which makes it really hard for "patriots" who aren't mad to vote for the lunatic who will demolish the thing you are patriotic about.
Trump is falling apart, will only get worse (watch him fire the sane advisors and rely on the core of mentalists screaming that the debate was "rigged" because Harris was given the questions beforehand), and will actively propel more and more conservatives to vote for the conservative candidate - Harris.
Perhaps I will be proven wrong. But I'm feeling pretty good about coming out weeks ago proclaiming that Harris will win bigly.
Trump still on 45-49% in all but one post debate poll suggests it will still be very close, there is not going to be a Harris landslide even if she scrapes home.
Indeed every post debate poll still has Harris below the 51% Biden got in 2020
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
LOL. Imagine on a betting site, only wanting to hear one side of the argument…
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
Electoral Calculus would give us a Lanbour majority of 48 for what it's worth, which is nothing of course.
As polling companies always overstate Reform, including at the recent election, have they kicked the habit now?
Election Polling has a Lab Majority of 46 but I suspect that, on those numbers, swing calculators will pretty much start to break down.
Both the poll and Electoral Calculus are nonsense at this stage. The first significant test in my view are English council elections next May, keeping an eye on whether the Conservatives start turning things round.
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
I suspect Letby was guilty as the jury found but there is a case she did not have all the medical experts she was entitled to called by her defence team
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
I think the election is on a knife edge. But repeating obvious garbage from Maga twits on X isn’t going to help my or your betting position!
Swing of 3% from Labour to the Tories already then since the GE and the Tories have not even elected their new leader yet.
LDs and Reform and Greens all increased voteshare too
There's an implicit assumption there that a new Conservative leader will be an improvement on the old one, popularity-wise.
That's, at best, unproven.
JEN[SPAM TRAPPED]
The idea that someone who is most famous for painting over a Disney Mural is going to be an improvement on Rishi is one I can't see many people agreeing with.
If you wanted a Tory leader that encouraged none Tory voters to vote for any other option Jenrick is almost the perfect candidate...
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
Nah, you're willingly amplifying their bollocks under the cover of being a balance brigader. At least do it with some humour rather than chin stroking about how interesting you find it.
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
I suspect Letby was guilty as the jury found but there is a case she did not have all the medical experts she was entitled to called by her defence team
Her second trial has not yet been appealed, and nothing prevents her new team doing so. Probably they will, as they will also seek to refer the first trial to the CCRC. They can canvass all of those issues freely. Wait and see. There is at the moment no evidence at all that Letby was defended by idiots who didn't realise they held the key to freedom in their hands and couldn't be bothered to use it.
Swing of 3% from Labour to the Tories already then since the GE and the Tories have not even elected their new leader yet.
LDs and Reform and Greens all increased voteshare too
There's an implicit assumption there that a new Conservative leader will be an improvement on the old one, popularity-wise.
That's, at best, unproven.
JEN[SPAM TRAPPED]
The idea that someone who is most famous for painting over a Disney Mural is going to be an improvement on Rishi is one I can't see many people agreeing with.
If you wanted a Tory leader that encouraged none Tory voters to vote for any other option Jenrick is almost the perfect candidate...
He's the candidate that causes Starmer and Davey to spontaneously orgasm.
Because he may win over some Reform voters, but at the cost of royally pissing off large chunks of what they have left of their loyal base.
For even more context, this was 1 in 6 of every child in the 'church'.
Another data point in my "Wherever you have religion, you will have abuse by members of that religion, using the religion for cover."
At which point some people screech "Not my religion!"; showing that *they*, if not abusers themselves, are part of the problem.
Joe Rogan has a good theory that the reason the Catholic Church told priests to be celibate, is that they were the original community rock stars who spent their lives chasing women.
Of course, asking them to be celibate has shown to attract a different type of pervert instead, but it’s not a totally bonkers theory as to why it happened.
It may sound like a good theory but it isn't correct. In fact, clerical celibacy was a comparatively late development, only being enforced in Western Europe from the twelfth century onwards as a point of difference with the Orthodox Church on a stricter interpretation of Paul's teachings.
And more pertinently, since it led to a massive upsurge of promiscuity among clergy who could no longer legally marry, it takes the facts backwards.
Joe Rogan talking out of his arse? Surely not
Just Rogan josh-ing....
I thought that a driver was that clergy families were becoming very rich and powerful - using the Church as hereditary career path?
Aristos and landowners wanted some of that, too, so supported the doctrine, on the logic that they could get control but little Willie who got the gig couldn't legally sire his own lineage presumably ...?
Continued almost into living memory in the C of E, only the vicars were allowed to marry so they got both sides of the cake. Many a parish where the landowner gave the job of rector to his son/nephew. Or even they were one and the same 'squarson'.
In the 18th century becoming a vicar was a role for a third or fourth son of the landed gentry, the first would inherit the estate, the second might go into the army and the third the law or the church. Being married they could then hope to live in one of the fine Georgian Rectories you see in Country Life or now sold by Savills.
Sons of aristocracy who weren't the main heir might also enter the church but with the hope of becoming a Bishop or Cathedral Dean rather than mere country parson
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
I suspect Letby was guilty as the jury found but there is a case she did not have all the medical experts she was entitled to called by her defence team
Is there - it's equally the case that those medical experts would have provided evidence that wouldn't have helped Letby's case so they weren't called.
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
I suspect Letby was guilty as the jury found but there is a case she did not have all the medical experts she was entitled to called by her defence team
Her second trial has not yet been appealed, and nothing prevents her new team doing so. Probably they will, as they will also seek to refer the first trial to the CCRC. They can canvass all of those issues freely. Wait and see. There is at the moment no evidence at all that Letby was defended by idiots who didn't realise they held the key to freedom in their hands and couldn't be bothered to use it.
A point someone made elsewhere; it's not just a case of being 'defended by idiots'. it's also a case of funding. You can have the best lawyers in the land, but if you want them to do a thorough job, they need paying. That's not a criticism of lawyers; just a statement that legal aid can only go so far, and they may not go down certain avenues because they simply do not have time. The prosecution spent over £2.5 million (1)
(It'll be interesting to see how much was spent on the defence in the Letby case trial; and whether the insinuation holds up.)
Swing of 3% from Labour to the Tories already then since the GE and the Tories have not even elected their new leader yet.
LDs and Reform and Greens all increased voteshare too
There's an implicit assumption there that a new Conservative leader will be an improvement on the old one, popularity-wise.
That's, at best, unproven.
JEN[SPAM TRAPPED]
The idea that someone who is most famous for painting over a Disney Mural is going to be an improvement on Rishi is one I can't see many people agreeing with.
If you wanted a Tory leader that encouraged none Tory voters to vote for any other option Jenrick is almost the perfect candidate...
His popularity will rise once the country realises he is a lawyer.
Just had a fiver on Vance next president at 300. After all they laughed when I piled on Harris.
If somehow Vance becomes POTUS in Jan then I will be wallowing in BF cash!!
Huge win.
V v unlikely though.
Oh sure. But Trump suddenly looks much madder and more fragile to me. If there's a crisis between now and Nov and Vance comes sharply in I will happily take a profit. Worked with KH.
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
I suspect Letby was guilty as the jury found but there is a case she did not have all the medical experts she was entitled to called by her defence team
Is there - it's equally the case that those medical experts would have provided evidence that wouldn't have helped Letby's case so they weren't called.
It'd be interesting for a statistician to get the full data set over a long period. There might be other problems; e.g. were breathing tubes dislodged in the hospital Letby usually worked in? If not, then why did she change her methodology at that hospital?
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
I suspect Letby was guilty as the jury found but there is a case she did not have all the medical experts she was entitled to called by her defence team
Her second trial has not yet been appealed, and nothing prevents her new team doing so. Probably they will, as they will also seek to refer the first trial to the CCRC. They can canvass all of those issues freely. Wait and see. There is at the moment no evidence at all that Letby was defended by idiots who didn't realise they held the key to freedom in their hands and couldn't be bothered to use it.
A point someone made elsewhere; it's not just a case of being 'defended by idiots'. it's also a case of funding. You can have the best lawyers in the land, but if you want them to do a thorough job, they need paying. That's not a criticism of lawyers; just a statement that legal aid can only go so far, and they may not go down certain avenues because they simply do not have time. The prosecution spent over £2.5 million (1)
(It'll be interesting to see how much was spent on the defence in the Letby case trial; and whether the insinuation holds up.)
Swing of 3% from Labour to the Tories already then since the GE and the Tories have not even elected their new leader yet.
LDs and Reform and Greens all increased voteshare too
There's an implicit assumption there that a new Conservative leader will be an improvement on the old one, popularity-wise.
That's, at best, unproven.
JEN[SPAM TRAPPED]
The idea that someone who is most famous for painting over a Disney Mural is going to be an improvement on Rishi is one I can't see many people agreeing with.
If you wanted a Tory leader that encouraged none Tory voters to vote for any other option Jenrick is almost the perfect candidate...
Ipsos found 2024 Tory voters preferred Cleverly most but on a net basis Jenrick was their preferred option.
Stride polled worst with 2024 Tories with Patel polling worst on a net basis followed by Badenoch.
Trump looked low energy at his Arizona rally last night . And going around saying he won the debate makes him seem delusional. Harris will only do another debate if the mics are left on and Trumps team won’t want that .
Swing of 3% from Labour to the Tories already then since the GE and the Tories have not even elected their new leader yet.
LDs and Reform and Greens all increased voteshare too
There's an implicit assumption there that a new Conservative leader will be an improvement on the old one, popularity-wise.
That's, at best, unproven.
JEN[SPAM TRAPPED]
The idea that someone who is most famous for painting over a Disney Mural is going to be an improvement on Rishi is one I can't see many people agreeing with.
If you wanted a Tory leader that encouraged none Tory voters to vote for any other option Jenrick is almost the perfect candidate...
He's the candidate that causes Starmer and Davey to spontaneously orgasm.
Because he may win over some Reform voters, but at the cost of royally pissing off large chunks of what they have left of their loyal base.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Perhaps you could focus on those conservatives like Dick Cheney, every living Defence Secretary including Trump’s own, or perhaps Trump’s own Veep?
Trump looked low energy at his Arizona rally last night . And going around saying he won the debate makes him seem delusional. Harris will only do another debate if the mics are left on and Trumps team won’t want that .
Being delusional hasn't really harmed his polling in the last decade. Maybe it will in the next two months, but it doesn't seem sufficient.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Perhaps you could focus on those conservatives like Dick Cheney, every living Defence Secretary including Trump’s own, or perhaps Trump’s own Veep?
MAGAs are blow everything up revolutionaries not conservatives.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Electoral Calculus would give us a Lanbour majority of 48 for what it's worth, which is nothing of course.
As polling companies always overstate Reform, including at the recent election, have they kicked the habit now?
Election Polling has a Lab Majority of 46 but I suspect that, on those numbers, swing calculators will pretty much start to break down.
Both the poll and Electoral Calculus are nonsense at this stage. The first significant test in my view are English council elections next May, keeping an eye on whether the Conservatives start turning things round.
Next year's county elections will likely see Tory losses given they won the 2021 county council elections on a NEV basis, probably Reform and the LDs will gain from Labour and the Tories.
From 2026 though the Tories should start to gain local council seats back as 2022 was when Labour first moved ahead of the Tories on NEV in the local elections
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
On topic: It's the right call by him because he can't debate anybody who can debate. Another one would introduce more risk than potential reward for him.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Trump looked low energy at his Arizona rally last night . And going around saying he won the debate makes him seem delusional. Harris will only do another debate if the mics are left on and Trumps team won’t want that .
What was his nickname for Jeb Bush, Low Energy Jeb. Ironic.
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
To me this has something of the whole Carl Beech saga about it: a breathless media running with any old crap, showboating politicians stirring the pot, a big dollop of conspiracy theory, while all the time cooler heads are ignored or even derided. But I agree: as this inquiry goes on most of the truthers will probably creep away and never mention it again.
Just had a fiver on Vance next president at 300. After all they laughed when I piled on Harris.
If somehow Vance becomes POTUS in Jan then I will be wallowing in BF cash!!
Huge win.
V v unlikely though.
Will you? Check the betting rules. You are probably betting on who wins the election on November 5th, not on who eventually becomes president. (And even who wins the election is not necessarily defined how you'd think.)
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
Yes, Rubin was another victim of Tenet Media.
If someone offers me $100k a week I might try and have some idea who they were, but maybe I live in a different world.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
Yes, Rubin was another victim of Tenet Media.
If someone offers me $100k a week I might try and have some idea who they were, but maybe I live in a different world.
Yes, this company was well organised and had fake profiles of their ‘investors’. The FBI is speaking to them and treating them as victims.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
Yes, Rubin was another victim of Tenet Media.
If someone offers me $100k a week I might try and have some idea who they were, but maybe I live in a different world.
Yes, this company was well organised and had fake profiles of their ‘investors’. The FBI is speaking to them and treating them as victims.
It is possible he didn't know they were Russian. But someone accepting $100k a week to spout political commentary by an unknown donor is not someone worth listening to, imo.
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
To me this has something of the whole Carl Beech saga about it: a breathless media running with any old crap, showboating politicians stirring the pot, a big dollop of conspiracy theory, while all the time cooler heads are ignored or even derided. But I agree: as this inquiry goes on most of the truthers will probably creep away and never mention it again.
There are surely two separate questions. Did Letby kill at least some babies? Probably. Did she receive a fair trial? Probably not.
And a major flaw, as has happened in other cases, is that neither jurists nor jurors know the first thing about probability and statistics. The system is simply not set up to cope with this sort of evidence, and what we end up with is conviction on the basis of ‘no smoke without fire’ which might be correct but is hardly satisfactory.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
Yes, Rubin was another victim of Tenet Media.
If someone offers me $100k a week I might try and have some idea who they were, but maybe I live in a different world.
Yes, this company was well organised and had fake profiles of their ‘investors’. The FBI is speaking to them and treating them as victims.
It is possible he didn't know they were Russian. But someone accepting $100k a week to spout political commentary by an unknown donor is not someone worth listening to, imo.
That’s the going rate for buying up a podcast in the US. Rubin earns millions from his own regular channels on Rumble, YouTube, and other podcast platforms.
Swing of 3% from Labour to the Tories already then since the GE and the Tories have not even elected their new leader yet.
LDs and Reform and Greens all increased voteshare too
There's an implicit assumption there that a new Conservative leader will be an improvement on the old one, popularity-wise.
That's, at best, unproven.
JEN[SPAM TRAPPED]
The idea that someone who is most famous for painting over a Disney Mural is going to be an improvement on Rishi is one I can't see many people agreeing with.
If you wanted a Tory leader that encouraged none Tory voters to vote for any other option Jenrick is almost the perfect candidate...
His popularity will rise once the country realises he is a lawyer.
Just look at the landslide lawyer Starmer won.
Starmer v Jenrick would be the first lawyer v lawyer PM v LOTO battle since Blair v Michael Howard (albeit Jenrick was a city solicitor whereas the other 3 were barristers).
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
Yes, Rubin was another victim of Tenet Media.
If someone offers me $100k a week I might try and have some idea who they were, but maybe I live in a different world.
Yes, this company was well organised and had fake profiles of their ‘investors’. The FBI is speaking to them and treating them as victims.
It is possible he didn't know they were Russian. But someone accepting $100k a week to spout political commentary by an unknown donor is not someone worth listening to, imo.
That’s the going rate for buying up a podcast in the US. Rubin earns millions from his own regular channels on Rumble, YouTube, and other podcast platforms.
It is the going rate because foreign states and malign billlionaires seek to distort the truth.
Mr. JohnL, while grim, I was reminded how weird stats can be recently when I discovered while a large percentage of childhood cancers are leukemia, most leukemia sufferers are adults (by a very large margin). That was counter-intuitive.
It's primarily an adult disease. But a very large percentage of children who have cancer have leukemia.
Just had a fiver on Vance next president at 300. After all they laughed when I piled on Harris.
If somehow Vance becomes POTUS in Jan then I will be wallowing in BF cash!!
Huge win.
V v unlikely though.
Will you? Check the betting rules. You are probably betting on who wins the election on November 5th, not on who eventually becomes president. (And even who wins the election is not necessarily defined how you'd think.)
As far as I can see the rules are that the winner will be the one declared the winner of ECV by AP news AND that the loser has conceded. If not then whoever Congress decides.
So - for it to be Vance, Trump has to be out for some reason by date of the AP result declaration (and Harris concedes) or, by some complex legal process, Vance ends up being picked by Congress.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
But after her trial last year Cheshire Police revealed it was investigating the time she spent on two placements in Liverpool in 2012 and 2015.
He told the inquiry that some babies collapsed due to dislodgement of endotracheal [breathing] tubes.
"This is not something that is happening all the time", he said.
"It is unusual, and you will hear that it occurs generally in less than 1% of shifts."
The audit found that there were recorded incidents of the tubes being dislodged on 40% of the shifts Letby worked at Liverpool Womens' Hospital.
Mr Baker said: "In light of what we know now, we might wonder why.”
A number of the usual suspects (Davis, Hitchens et al) have hitched their wagon to the 'Free The Letby One' campaign. I think there is a reasonable chance that the overwhelming nature of the case against her and the utterly feeble nature of the criticisms will cause those in public life who have done so to stop this fairly soon, out of embarrassment and respect for the families.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
To me this has something of the whole Carl Beech saga about it: a breathless media running with any old crap, showboating politicians stirring the pot, a big dollop of conspiracy theory, while all the time cooler heads are ignored or even derided. But I agree: as this inquiry goes on most of the truthers will probably creep away and never mention it again.
There are surely two separate questions. Did Letby kill at least some babies? Probably. Did she receive a fair trial? Probably not.
And a major flaw, as has happened in other cases, is that neither jurists nor jurors know the first thing about probability and statistics. The system is simply not set up to cope with this sort of evidence, and what we end up with is conviction on the basis of ‘no smoke without fire’ which might be correct but is hardly satisfactory.
If you remove the jury, I'd suggest the Letby case goes from a 97% certainty of some convictions to a 99.9999% certainty of some convictions.
'China will "gradually raise" its retirement age for the first time since the 1950s, as the country confronts an ageing population and a dwindling pension budget.
The top legislative body on Friday approved proposals to raise the statutory retirement age from 50 to 55 for women in blue-collar jobs, and from 55 to 58 for females in white-collar jobs.
2025 is going to be a fallow year for political drama after everything we've had and might yet have in 2024.
We've got Australia (Albo out, that arsehole who looks like he's been on fire in), Canada (who cares) and 26 Counties (cordon sanitaire against SF government probably holds). Some locals in the UK and that's it.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
Yes, Rubin was another victim of Tenet Media.
If someone offers me $100k a week I might try and have some idea who they were, but maybe I live in a different world.
Yes, this company was well organised and had fake profiles of their ‘investors’. The FBI is speaking to them and treating them as victims.
It is possible he didn't know they were Russian. But someone accepting $100k a week to spout political commentary by an unknown donor is not someone worth listening to, imo.
That’s the going rate for buying up a podcast in the US. Rubin earns millions from his own regular channels on Rumble, YouTube, and other podcast platforms.
It is the going rate because foreign states and malign billlionaires seek to distort the truth.
Every creator involved in Tenet Media has confirmed that the company had no editorial influence over their output.
Ban on rental bidding wars is on the way - but will it work?
"The government has set out plans to end bidding wars as part of a wider Renters' Rights Bill, which was published on Wednesday.
Under the legislation, which still needs to be approved by MPs and peers, landlords and letting agents would be legally required to publish an asking rent for their property and banned from encouraging or accepting any bids above this price."
It took me one second to realise what this would probably do. It is likely to just mean that asking prices for rents will increase substantially, if the legislation is enforced, with the 'bids' being up to the asking price, which would be the highest price possible.
Interfering with the market to solve a problem like this (high rents) is typically regarded as a bad idea for very good reasons.
Nothing to stop landlords going for an "asking price" at least 20% over what they would actually accept. There will be people deseprate enough to make an offer mid way.
How do Labour plan to win the battle of mid way?
Rent controls don’t work. Who knew?
This Labour government does look to be politically tone deaf. Early days, but the memories of how bad the Tories were are fading faster than anybody thoight possible.
"At least the Tories never did [insert x y or z]"
Let's face it, the Tories have been tinkering with market forces themselves, from the energy price cap to £2 maximum bus fare to the apparent monopoly the big developers have on building houses. And those people who voted Labour to kick out the Tories (or LibDem, knowing that would mean) will be expecting Labour to do, er, Labour-ish things.
The long term financial position looks grim. By 2070 we have the demographics and public debt of Japan, though without such amazing public toilets.
Be wary of demographic projections out that far. Demographers are very good at predicting births and pretty good on deaths, but they have no idea on immigration.
If we go the Japanese route on immigration, then yes our economy is in big trouble. But I'm hopeful we will be open to young people from around the world coming and working here.
Unpopular opinion incoming. As told by Trump supporters.
When there’s a boxing match, the winner says “I won”, and the loser says “Can we have a rematch?”
Trump was all up for a series of debates, it was Team Harris that only wanted this one debate, in a carefully-controlled environment with a very friendly team of presenters.
Now that debate has happened, and Harris didn’t totally implode as they thought she might, they’re looking for another.
Trump will want the next debate on Fox, with an audience present and without the presenters “fact-checking” one side and not the other.
My personal view, is that there will be a week or two of back-and-forth, but they will eventually agree to another meeting. Both sides think they can win a second debate.
Dude you are getting about as credible as our Saturday morning visitors with your spinning.
Yes, it’s a shame as @Sandpit is an otherwise good poster
Do we want this site to be a one-way Harris propoganda machine?
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
You post a load of stuff, with no links, and then claim to be 'looking at the other side'.
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
I post a fair number of links, am genuinely trying to bring to this forum an idea of what American conservatives and Republicans are talking about, in an environment in which two sides are talking past each other and can agree on little more than today being Friday.
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
Yes, Rubin was another victim of Tenet Media.
If someone offers me $100k a week I might try and have some idea who they were, but maybe I live in a different world.
Yes, this company was well organised and had fake profiles of their ‘investors’. The FBI is speaking to them and treating them as victims.
It is possible he didn't know they were Russian. But someone accepting $100k a week to spout political commentary by an unknown donor is not someone worth listening to, imo.
That’s the going rate for buying up a podcast in the US. Rubin earns millions from his own regular channels on Rumble, YouTube, and other podcast platforms.
It is the going rate because foreign states and malign billlionaires seek to distort the truth.
Every creator involved in Tenet Media has confirmed that the company had no editorial influence over their output.
And I can't trust what they say because they were, wittingly or unwittingly, funded by the Russian disinformation arm of Putin.
Comments
Voting Labour isn't really, as only two principal parties of government were available, and the other one was the Tories.
Want to know what Dubai looked like 18 years ago, compared to today?
https://hfre.ae/blog/dubai-before-and-after-all-roads-lead-to-dubai
As a country you need to be on top of national infrastructure, and pay off everyone who gets in the way of it. It’s the single biggest determinant of economic growth.
So some logic in him refusing a third debate
Now I have only watched a small subset of them but two do stand out and both were done without notes:
Nigel Farage (Reform) - No matter what you think of him (and in my case not a lot) he can speak. He is excellent.
Chris Coghlan (LD) - His speech was brilliant. He was terribly nervous, but it was one of the most moving speeches I have ever heard. As I have mentioned before he is an MP to watch out for as he also has an excellent CV reminiscent of Paddy Ashdown. I recommend watching it and stick to it to the end for the full impact.
What is notable about these two is I can remember what both of them were talking about. I can't for any of the others.
LDs and Reform and Greens all increased voteshare too
As polling companies always overstate Reform, including at the recent election, have they kicked the habit now?
It would be a grouping based around the one policy they have in common - PR. And there'd be another election as soon as it was possible to do so under the new arrangements.
It seems extremely unlikely, but is it impossible ?
As swingers go, Stringfellow it ain't.
That's, at best, unproven.
Still leading. Five years to an election.
1) Oil and gas prices to rise substantially;
2) The cost of electricity from renewables to crater so they become the cheaper and more secure option.
The fact is, both are already happening due to factors beyond our control. A smart government would be pushing hard to build tidal, wind, hydro and solar (possibly also nuclear) on a grand scale.
Unfortunately, with successive governments that's been a mixed success. We've had an over dependence on gas instead, which is suboptimal economically in the long term even if logical in the short term.
Huge win.
V v unlikely though.
Mr Baker KC noted that the victims' families are anxious to preserve anonymity because they fear personal abuse etc from conspiracy theorists.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOoiDxL4Nqw&t=1410s
Continued almost into living memory in the C of E, only the vicars were allowed to marry so they got both sides of the cake. Many a parish where the landowner gave the job of rector to his son/nephew. Or even they were one and the same 'squarson'.
The problem is allowing small groups of activists who will campaign against everything, an outsized platform in which to express their opinion against the expressed will of the majority.
Parliament should pass “Heathrow Runway #3 Act”, and the bulldozers should be there the following week, building it.
Indeed every post debate poll still has Harris below the 51% Biden got in 2020
Some of us are looking at the other side of American Twitter, so you don’t have to.
https://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/reform-uk
https://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative
Twitter is a cesspit. If you're giving the other side, at the very least give links so we can see how *credible* the source is. Chances are it's BS.
If you wanted a Tory leader that encouraged none Tory voters to vote for any other option Jenrick is almost the perfect candidate...
Because he may win over some Reform voters, but at the cost of royally pissing off large chunks of what they have left of their loyal base.
Sons of aristocracy who weren't the main heir might also enter the church but with the hope of becoming a Bishop or Cathedral Dean rather than mere country parson
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cx2g20rpr78o from yesterday is rather damning corroborating evidence
(It'll be interesting to see how much was spent on the defence in the Letby case trial; and whether the insinuation holds up.)
(1) https://www.cps.gov.uk/foi/2023/prosecution-costs-august-2023-lucy-letby-trial
"Cyber-dog drone with flamethrower against enemies of Ukraine"
https://x.com/Heroiam_Slava/status/1834507200242327685
Just look at the landslide lawyer Starmer won.
Here’s an example:
https://x.com/rubinreport/status/1833964139330633916
Video fact-checking Harris from the debate, by Dave Rubin. He’s a fairly mainstream conservative, former liberal and originally a DeSantis supporter.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12619437/Lucy-Letby-cost-taxpayer-4m-Serial-killer-nurse-awarded-1-5m-legal-aid-ten-month-trial-cost-Crown-Prosecution-Service-2-5m.html
Stride polled worst with 2024 Tories with Patel polling worst on a net basis followed by Badenoch.
Amongst all voters Cleverly polled best and Tugendhat best on a net basis but it was Patel who polled worst on a net basis followed by Badenoch, Jenrick in the middle
https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/james-cleverly-tops-list-who-would-make-good-tory-leader-3-in-5-say-they-dont-care
From 2026 though the Tories should start to gain local council seats back as 2022 was when Labour first moved ahead of the Tories on NEV in the local elections
Affiliation with Russian disinformation campaign
In September 2024, two Russian state media employees were charged with secretly funding almost $10 million to a Tennessee company for the production of political videos to benefit Russia by influencing the United States. The company's description matches that of Tenet Media, which had employed Rubin and other right-wing influencers.[48] Rubin matches the indictment's description of "Commentator-1", who it alleges agreed to produce "four weekly videos that he would host and would be livestreamed by Tenet Media in exchange for $400,000 per month and a $100,000 signing bonus".[49][50] In his response to the indictment on Twitter, Rubin stated that he was unaware of the company's connections to Russian funding and declared himself a victim of the alleged scheme.[51] “The company never disclosed to the influencers – or to their millions of followers – its ties to [Russian state media company] RT and the Russian government,” US attorney general Merrick Garland said.[52]
And a major flaw, as has happened in other cases, is that neither jurists nor jurors know the first thing about probability and statistics. The system is simply not set up to cope with this sort of evidence, and what we end up with is conviction on the basis of ‘no smoke without fire’ which might be correct but is hardly satisfactory.
It's primarily an adult disease. But a very large percentage of children who have cancer have leukemia.
A few of us have bought that insurance.
Though the guy is an imbecile.
QUICK: What are the lies they are telling about you?
VANCE: One of the things they say about Donald Trump's economic policies is that they're inflationary
QUICK: But tariffs are inflationary
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1834235321589846105
So - for it to be Vance, Trump has to be out for some reason by date of the AP result declaration (and Harris concedes) or, by some complex legal process, Vance ends up being picked by Congress.
Sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting la la la at views from a pro-Trump perspective does an injustice to this site.
Go America Trump.
The top legislative body on Friday approved proposals to raise the statutory retirement age from 50 to 55 for women in blue-collar jobs, and from 55 to 58 for females in white-collar jobs.
Men will see an increase from 60 to 63.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c62421le4j6o
We've got Australia (Albo out, that arsehole who looks like he's been on fire in), Canada (who cares) and 26 Counties (cordon sanitaire against SF government probably holds). Some locals in the UK and that's it.
I have got this conspiracy thing right haven't I?
If we go the Japanese route on immigration, then yes our economy is in big trouble. But I'm hopeful we will be open to young people from around the world coming and working here.
To employ his boxing analogy, it would be a mismatch and a bout like that is dangerous for the underdog. It can cause serious injury and end careers.