If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.
Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
Yes - I remember my undergraduate British politics course (taught by David Marquand) demonstrating this point. Thr Falklands brought a temporary spike in Con VI, but it reverted to the trend line comfortably before the election.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.
Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.
As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.
Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
Not entirely true, Farage doesn't want Jenrick as Tory leader he wants Tugendhat or Cleverly. In fact I think Farage fears Jenrick even more than Badenoch. Jenrick with white working class parents from the Midlands unlike him and taking a hard line on immigration designed to appeal to ex Tory Reform voters.
It is Starmer and Davey who want Jenrick not Tugendhat or Cleverly. So you are right for them but not for Farage
If I have one criticism of the above post, it is that it appears to be laid out as - and therefore I am trying to read it as - a poem, and I can't make it scan. I'm sure its unintentional. But aside from that, I think you are right. There are no obviously good answers for any big party in multiparty politics.
Well Jenrick looks the best in the race to me. He certainly exercises our enemies more than the others. Those who wrote off Cameron and Thatcher are writing him off. However, the markets have not been scared by Starmer so far. For me that has been a surprise for twelve months. The council elections 2026 and 2027 will give a guide as to how things are going. 2025 are too early to say how the right copes with its current divisions between Conservative and Reform.
One thing I think Foxy's excellent recent header didn't pick up on ?
In a First Among (US) Christians, Young Men Are More Religious Than Young Women At Grace Church in Waco, Texas, the Generation Z gender divide can be seen in the pews. It has the potential to reshape both politics and family life. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/23/us/young-men-religion-gen-z.html
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.
The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
Here’s an exercise if you are bored today. Go through your posts in the Truss days and to the election, maybe do the same for your other hard done by posters, and just check that in no way have you typed out bollocks posts for either political point scoring or gain. Or even the three of you have not posted pointless posts that add nothing to the discourse.
If, when you have done this, you can honestly claim that you have done nothing but post interesting, non-biased, non-pointless nonsense then I for one will happily quit the site you can stay in your bubble.
Otherwise just shut the fick up and accept that PB is full of banter, argument, things you disagree with, people you disagree with and counter the arguments of you care so much or ignore the arguments of you don’t.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.
Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.
As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.
Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
Not entirely true, Farage doesn't want Jenrick as Tory leader he wants Tugendhat or Cleverly. In fact I think Farage fears Jenrick even more than Badenoch. Jenrick with white working class parents from the Midlands unlike him and taking a hard line on immigration designed to appeal to ex Tory Reform voters.
It is Starmer and Davey who want Jenrick not Tugendhat or Cleverly. So you are right for them but not for Farage
If I have one criticism of the above post, it is that it appears to be laid out as - and therefore I am trying to read it as - a poem, and I can't make it scan. I'm sure its unintentional. But aside from that, I think you are right. There are no obviously good answers for any big party in multiparty politics.
Well Jenrick looks the best in the race to me. He certainly exercises our enemies more than the others. Those who wrote off Cameron and Thatcher are writing him off. However, the markets have not been scared by Starmer so far. For me that has been a surprise for twelve months. The council elections 2026 and 2027 will give a guide as to how things are going. 2025 are too early to say how the right copes with its current divisions between Conservative and Reform.
Aren't the next set of council elections those councillors elected under Johnson? It's completely dominated by sitting Tories in the Shires (19/21 county councils, 7/9 UAs) so will likely be a wipeout anyway if the Lib Dems hold it together.
FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.
Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.
It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.
I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last.
Some real progress on the things that matter to voters is needed in order to change the narrative. Not easy when my local health economy is forecasting a £120 million overspend across all Trusts and commissioners. This would extrapolate to about £6 billion nationally.
Spending political capital like that, to no purpose, suggests the lack of an overall plan.
Which is what New Labour definitely had.
I can’t see why they didn’t tell the OBR to work double shifts and get the budget out earlier. If, indeed, that is the blocker.
I don't know if Sunak meant for this to happen, but a July election really has buggered Labour.
Blair and Brown had their plan ready far early than a few months before 1997
I would expect that an outline plan for taking up government would be part of a leadership candidate's package. There'd be more immediate priorities such as tackling party problems of course, but with supporters you could work on more than one thing at once.
Then that outline plan would be refined and updated so you always have a good first stab in the file whenever the then PM fires the starting gun.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.
Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.
As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.
Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
Apparently so, and the "we told you so" message some are playing on repeat here leans into that.
There are three opportunities that Starmer has, which he may or may not take up.
Key one is that Starmer is a relatively fast learner, in a way that few of his predecessors have been. Possibly going back to Thatch.
The other is that the disjointed nature of the political summer has get in the way of developing a theme. The spending review is the key canvas and that's still a month off. It will look better once real stuff is happening.
Finally, most people love a comeback story. He won't convince the "I know he will be awful" types, but he doesn't need them.
Now, he may fail to take any of those opportunities. But it's much, much, much too early to tell.
"....Starmer is a relatively fast learner" - where does this come from? Genuine question.
I note that the Conservatives won both local byelections yesterday, one from Labour in Surrey (Nick Palmer's old ward) and the other from Green in Mid-Suffolk.
Something to watch out for, as there are quite a few by-elections coming up.
The Waverley Ward was a little unusual - it's a 3-member Ward (nothing unusual in that) but in 2023 a single candidate for each of Labour, Liberal Democrats and Greens stood against three Conservatives and the three non-Conservatives each got elected even though the three Conservatives got total got more votes. There was clearly a lot of vote splitting across the parties.
This time, single seat - Conservative vs LIb Dem vs Green vs Labour. The turnout went from 2,501 ballot papers issued to 1,785 so from 42% to 31%.
The Conservative vote held up - I'd argue those still willing to vote Conservative in 2023 were the core supporters who would come out to vote whatever. The LD vote halved numerically but was still decent - losing by just 11. The Green and Labour votes collapsed and in the absence of a Reform candidate, the Conservative won.
Good result, don't get me wrong, but slighlty unusual consequences. There have been hints in past weeks of a Conservative revival in local council by-elections (as you might expect) but it's far from a surge in Tory support, more what we often see under non-Conservative Governments, the Tory core vote comes out, it's much harder for other parties to get their support out (some of which clearly was anti-Conservative Government protest).
I expect plenty of good Conservative results in the coming weeks but we had this after 1997 - in 1998 the Conservatives gained 1300 seats for all the good it did them in 2001.
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.
The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
,
You sound like a petulant teenager, if you don,t like a poster then skip it, don,t whine like a big baby
It would be a reasonable argument if Trump had any policies at all that would reverse those price rises, whereas as far as I can see his unfunded tax cuts and pointless tariffs will make them much worse.
If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.
Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
Yes - I remember my undergraduate British politics course (taught by David Marquand) demonstrating this point. Thr Falklands brought a temporary spike in Con VI, but it reverted to the trend line comfortably before the election.
And I remember the election.
As do I, though very young.
It was an early version on Anyone-but-Corbyn.
Without the invasion, it's not at all impossible that the Alliance could have won. But they missed their one chance to realign UK politics, Kinnock took on Militant in '85, and that was pretty well it for them.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
You need to explain that to US voters, of whom I am not one. You could also tell them that the inflation of the past 4 years was largely outwith government control. That still looks an effective ad to me.
One thing I think Foxy's excellent recent header didn't pick up on ?
In a First Among (US) Christians, Young Men Are More Religious Than Young Women At Grace Church in Waco, Texas, the Generation Z gender divide can be seen in the pews. It has the potential to reshape both politics and family life. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/23/us/young-men-religion-gen-z.html
Scary! Though on the basis that all religions are misogynistic and that the misogynistic restrictions on abortion have been brought in at the behest of the religious right perhaps not surprising. (I have no knowledge of Grace church's position on abortion, they may be liberal christians)
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.
The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
No - it is not the answer
The answer is to accept sometimes politics is not to your liking
If Trump loses narrowly in November - which is around a 50/50 chance - I suspect a fair few Republicans will reflect on the fact that a more disciplined, conventional Republican candidate would have won fairly comfortably. There is a strong message there that his campaign is begging him to stay focussed on, but the senile old bastard keeps straying off it into paranoia, dogs and delusion.
If he wins narrowly, I don't suppose they'll care. But their candidate has made it all more difficult than it needed to be.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
Good morning indeed. I am genuinely entertained by just how bad Labour have been at politics since winning the election. The WFA move and the Child Benefit Cap retention were just plain wrong. Had they been able to pivot from "this was bad but thanks to this we can do x which is good" then maybe they would have got away with it.
Instead, as you say, the x is freebie freebie freebie. If they not grow up and start doing serious politics then this will absolutely fade into nothing - with a few exception there is always a bigger scandal down the road.
As for the PB Tory vs PB non-Tory thing, surely there is a balance to strike? Labour's performance has been laughable, pitiful, comedic. But despite all that it's still better than the performance of SunakTrussJohnson. As this morning's poll shows. And however bad Labour have been recently we know the Tories about say Hold My Beer and have the Parade of Losers at their conference where we find out whether Who? Because-its-a-Shithole, BadEnoch or JENRICK is the crowd favourite.
Jenrick would be MEGA - for every other party. And yet he seems to be the firm favourite. Are Tories really that stupid? To vote for that?
Another fart.
For some reason your posts make me want to defend Labour.
You may find yourself wanting to do that increasingly often. The next, what, 3 years are going to see a concerted threat to the Lab-Con duopoly from a slightly weird triumvirate of Reform (who’ll be the loudest and most commentated on), Greens (who’ll stand to gain big-time from Labour disillusionment- essentially taking the role the Lib Dems had in 2001-2010), and the Lib Dems who will go about their job more quietly but will be hard at work in their regions, particularly if Jenrick wins the leadership.
The Green Party - totally undeserved in my view given their nonsensical policy mix of crank student lefty and eco-NIMBY - are going to be big winners in the next few council election rounds. Possibly parliamentary byelections too, if the opportunity arises.
The Greens have a dilemma.
Of the 4 seats they hold are student lefty types and two are eco-NIMBY.
There is very little common ground between both types and look at the furious reaction from the student lefty types when the hapless Carla Denyer tweeted praising Joe Biden when he stood down. Suffice to say she collapsed like a house of cards under the pressure of a few angry tweets.
The Green Party, as it gains more seats and more councils, will move from playing at politics and opposing for the sake of it to having to deliver and having to compromise.
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.
Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.
It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.
I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last.
Some real progress on the things that matter to voters is needed in order to change the narrative. Not easy when my local health economy is forecasting a £120 million overspend across all Trusts and commissioners. This would extrapolate to about £6 billion nationally.
Spending political capital like that, to no purpose, suggests the lack of an overall plan.
Which is what New Labour definitely had.
I can’t see why they didn’t tell the OBR to work double shifts and get the budget out earlier. If, indeed, that is the blocker.
I don't know if Sunak meant for this to happen, but a July election really has buggered Labour.
Blair and Brown had their plan ready far early than a few months before 1997
I would expect that an outline plan for taking up government would be part of a leadership candidate's package. There'd be more immediate priorities such as tackling party problems of course, but with supporters you could work on more than one thing at once.
Then that outline plan would be refined and updated so you always have a good first stab in the file whenever the then PM fires the starting gun.
Good morning, everyone.
Good morning
Nature abhors a vacuum is an expression I am hearing a lot from political commentators.
I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.
It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year. That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.
So no big deal.
You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
It's no conspiracy that anything or anyone that looks vaguely pro Trump is bullied or trash-talked. Which means many stay silent.
Fact.
No-one posting stuff supporting Trump winning the election gets bullied or trash talked. Posters who post stuff supporting Trumps views get challenged, perhaps trash talkeed but not bullied. Same as anyone posting marxist or Putinist stuff get challenged and perhaps trash talked.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
FWIW, at dinner last night my group of friends (degree educated, late 20s/early 30s) spontaneously expressed disquiet about this Labour government.
Given the demographic, there was actually some support for the changes to WFP eligibility. And genuine admiration for way the far-right violence was crushed. No one mentioned the freebies stuff - this is definitely a PB/Telegraph bubble thing, particularly given the rank hypocrisy of the Tories making a fuss about it.
It was the lack of progress on anything else (waves vaguely) that has pissed people off.
I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last.
Some real progress on the things that matter to voters is needed in order to change the narrative. Not easy when my local health economy is forecasting a £120 million overspend across all Trusts and commissioners. This would extrapolate to about £6 billion nationally.
Spending political capital like that, to no purpose, suggests the lack of an overall plan.
Which is what New Labour definitely had.
I can’t see why they didn’t tell the OBR to work double shifts and get the budget out earlier. If, indeed, that is the blocker.
I don't know if Sunak meant for this to happen, but a July election really has buggered Labour.
Blair and Brown had their plan ready far early than a few months before 1997
I would expect that an outline plan for taking up government would be part of a leadership candidate's package. There'd be more immediate priorities such as tackling party problems of course, but with supporters you could work on more than one thing at once.
Then that outline plan would be refined and updated so you always have a good first stab in the file whenever the then PM fires the starting gun.
Good morning, everyone.
"I think that one of Starmers mistakes was to create a vacuum in which WFA and freebies dominated. First impressions last."
Absolutely. It was a huge unforced error to allow this summer to be dominated by WFA. Some have argued that it had to be done asap for technical reasons, so maybe they had no choice. But they have a hell of a lot of lost political ground to make up now.
Off Topic. I will need to buy some heating oil soon. Last year 500 litres cost 80.3p/l (inc 5% VAT) -Current price about 57.3p/l. I will need about 1,000 litres over the winter which will cost about £230 less than last year - will still miss the £250 extra in the pension though!
If Trump loses narrowly in November - which is around a 50/50 chance - I suspect a fair few Republicans will reflect on the fact that a more disciplined, conventional Republican candidate would have won fairly comfortably. There is a strong message there that his campaign is begging him to stay focussed on, but the senile old bastard keeps straying off it into paranoia, dogs and delusion.
If he wins narrowly, I don't suppose they'll care. But their candidate has made it all more difficult than it needed to be.
It is effective. The root cause of the inflation does not matter. It is an effective message that plays to a concern of the voter.
If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.
Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
Yes - I remember my undergraduate British politics course (taught by David Marquand) demonstrating this point. Thr Falklands brought a temporary spike in Con VI, but it reverted to the trend line comfortably before the election.
And I remember the election.
My earliest political memory is of Michael Foot's wife being knocked down by a low-hanging tree on the top of an open-topped bus in, let's say, Ipswich. Actually I was vaguely aware of Margaret Thatcher before that. But not really in a 'political' way.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Trump: For years they knocked the word "Tariff." The word, properly used, is a beautiful word. One of the most beautiful words I've ever heard. It is music to my ears… it will not cause inflation, by the way. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1838627746576306678
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.
The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
Here’s an exercise if you are bored today. Go through your posts in the Truss days and to the election, maybe do the same for your other hard done by posters, and just check that in no way have you typed out bollocks posts for either political point scoring or gain. Or even the three of you have not posted pointless posts that add nothing to the discourse.
If, when you have done this, you can honestly claim that you have done nothing but post interesting, non-biased, non-pointless nonsense then I for one will happily quit the site you can stay in your bubble.
Otherwise just shut the fick up and accept that PB is full of banter, argument, things you disagree with, people you disagree with and counter the arguments of you care so much or ignore the arguments of you don’t.
I don't believe I unnecessarily criticised Truss, as I recall I was greatly relieved that she managed the Queen's funeral arrangements rather than the embarrassment had Johnson done so, although you can spend as much time as you like proving me wrong. I spent plenty of hours deriding Johnson, but not with fake news with fact. Perhaps current discourse would be better served if some of those you are defending stuck to the same rules.
You have asked me to leave the site, otherwise you believe you can't stay. The posters who are making their rabid assertions aren't people I would choose to rub shoulders in reality, so perhaps I should do as you suggest and "stf up" although I believe unless you are really dim you realise you are the one advocating for a bubble of like-minded posters blowing smoke up each other's arses.
It's a shame a number of remaining posters aren't as bright as they seem to think they are.
If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.
Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
Yes - I remember my undergraduate British politics course (taught by David Marquand) demonstrating this point. Thr Falklands brought a temporary spike in Con VI, but it reverted to the trend line comfortably before the election.
And I remember the election.
As do I, though very young.
It was an early version on Anyone-but-Corbyn.
Without the invasion, it's not at all impossible that the Alliance could have won. But they missed their one chance to realign UK politics, Kinnock took on Militant in '85, and that was pretty well it for them.
What the Falklands conflict did was end the mid term trough early. I've told this story on here before but I was out canvassing in early March 1982 for the London Borough elections and remember walking down a street in Bromley which had been 90% Conservativr and finding house after house with people who were angry with Thatcher and prepared to either vote Alliance ot stay at home.
There's no doubt in my mind, absent the Falklands Conflict, the 1982 locals would have been a bloodbath for the Conservatives in London and elsewhere. It's quite possible Bruce Douglas-Mann would have won Mitcham & Morden strengthening the Alliance in London and causing further disquiet in the Conservatives which could have continued to the Party Conference later that year.
I very much doubt you would have seen a 144-seat landslide in the next election and a much smaller majority might have caused problems in pushing through the radical second term agenda with the privatisations.
It's just not as simple as the Conservatives would have won anyway and everything would have carried on as we know it.
If there hadn't been the Falklands war the Thatcher government would have been finished.
Fake news, the Tories were recovering in the polls before the invasion of the Malvinas.
They'd still possibly have lost, though. The war turned what was a flip of the coin into a certainty. And had Thatcher actually lost the Falklands, she'd have lost the election.
Saying "they'd still possibly have lost" is just pointing out that counterfactuals, by their nature, have uncertainty baked in.
We know that if the Falklands War happened, Thatcher would have won by a landslide... because it DID happen, and she DID win by a landslide.
We don't know with certainty what would have happened if the Falklands War didn't happen, because we don't live in the world where it didn't.
It seems quite plausible to me that the Tories would've won pretty comfortably as Labour were in a weak position, the novelty of the SDP was wearing off, and the economy was improving in some respects. But none of us can ever know that with absolute certainty as the hypothesis was not and never can be tested.
One thing I think Foxy's excellent recent header didn't pick up on ?
In a First Among (US) Christians, Young Men Are More Religious Than Young Women At Grace Church in Waco, Texas, the Generation Z gender divide can be seen in the pews. It has the potential to reshape both politics and family life. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/23/us/young-men-religion-gen-z.html
The header was long enough already, but one interesting trend is that Trump supporters are increasingly likely to identify as Evangelicals, seeing it as a broader part of the world view. I think these men are part of that trend, as indeed are the young women turned off by Trumpism. This article covers the issue.
We should all watch very carefully to see what this government does in Lord Alli's interests over the coming months and years.
He will an expectation of something, of that you can be sure.
Maybe he doesn't. It's not impossible he is just one of those people who likes to help and really wants to be involved and he sees all this donating and lending flats as a way to help. I have no idea.
Whatever the optics are appalling after all the sledging of Tories over sleaze.
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
Aw, diddums. His son could not be disturbed, therefore he accepted a bung that would be a massive amount for the ordinary person on the street?
Yet his government wants to cause other families with kids in school, or doing exams, untold disruption by adding VAT onto school fees?
Despite Labour’s difficult Summer and self inflicted wounds, I would still say that Labour retain the strongest position of any of the parties. The Tories are currently the weakest by far.
Labour may have dug itself a 10ft hole, but the Tories are in the Mariana Trench.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.
The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
Here’s an exercise if you are bored today. Go through your posts in the Truss days and to the election, maybe do the same for your other hard done by posters, and just check that in no way have you typed out bollocks posts for either political point scoring or gain. Or even the three of you have not posted pointless posts that add nothing to the discourse.
If, when you have done this, you can honestly claim that you have done nothing but post interesting, non-biased, non-pointless nonsense then I for one will happily quit the site you can stay in your bubble.
Otherwise just shut the fick up and accept that PB is full of banter, argument, things you disagree with, people you disagree with and counter the arguments of you care so much or ignore the arguments of you don’t.
I don't believe I unnecessarily criticised Truss, as I recall I was greatly relieved that she managed the Queen's funeral arrangements rather than the embarrassment had Johnson done so, although you can spend as much time as you like proving me wrong. I spent plenty of hours deriding Johnson, but not with fake news with fact. Perhaps current discourse would be better served if some of those you are defending stuck to the same rules.
You have asked me to leave the site, otherwise you believe you can't stay. The posters who are making their rabid assertions aren't people I would choose to rub shoulders in reality, so perhaps I should do as you suggest and "stf up" although I believe unless you are really dim you realise you are the one advocating for a bubble of like-minded posters blowing smoke up each other's arses.
It's a shame a number of remaining posters aren't as bright as they seem to think they are.
Toodle pip.
"Fake news" is itself a fake, Trumpian concept is it not? I have not seen any claims made about Starmer which go beyond what is reported in the UK press and headline news sites and not denied by Labour. So fake news but without the fake part.
This 20k to move my boy to a different part of Hampstead stuff is as precious as it gets.
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
He should pay income tax on that!
Without knowing the specifics - given that he has a 16 year old, I would guess at a residential sixth form college. Something like d’Overbroeck's.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Despite Labour’s difficult Summer and self inflicted wounds, I would still say that Labour retain the strongest position of any of the parties. The Tories are currently the weakest by far.
Labour may have dug itself a 10ft hole, but the Tories are in the Mariana Trench.
I pretty much agree (though the Lob Dems may be in a better position than Labour, if only they were more visible...). But that does not excuse the hole that Labour have got themselves into, or the possibility that they will continue digging much deeper.
The problem is that these errors by Labour have been totally unforced. They're errors made by a combination of greed, hypocrisy, and not being very good at this politics lark.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.
The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
Here’s an exercise if you are bored today. Go through your posts in the Truss days and to the election, maybe do the same for your other hard done by posters, and just check that in no way have you typed out bollocks posts for either political point scoring or gain. Or even the three of you have not posted pointless posts that add nothing to the discourse.
If, when you have done this, you can honestly claim that you have done nothing but post interesting, non-biased, non-pointless nonsense then I for one will happily quit the site you can stay in your bubble.
Otherwise just shut the fick up and accept that PB is full of banter, argument, things you disagree with, people you disagree with and counter the arguments of you care so much or ignore the arguments of you don’t.
I don't believe I unnecessarily criticised Truss, as I recall I was greatly relieved that she managed the Queen's funeral arrangements rather than the embarrassment had Johnson done so, although you can spend as much time as you like proving me wrong. I spent plenty of hours deriding Johnson, but not with fake news with fact. Perhaps current discourse would be better served if some of those you are defending stuck to the same rules.
You have asked me to leave the site, otherwise you believe you can't stay. The posters who are making their rabid assertions aren't people I would choose to rub shoulders in reality, so perhaps I should do as you suggest and "stf up" although I believe unless you are really dim you realise you are the one advocating for a bubble of like-minded posters blowing smoke up each other's arses.
It's a shame a number of remaining posters aren't as bright as they seem to think they are.
Toodle pip.
Very strange take on what I wrote. I’m all for a plurality of views here and not the one calling for other people to leave but suggesting that those who do should check their own past behaviour.
We know both sides will post fake or dodgy news in defence of their side - sometimes seriously and sometimes trolling. It’s all part of the rich tapestry here and clearly you can tell what’s real and not.
I didn’t ask you to leave otherwise I can’t stay - I was making an offer that if you cannot find anything you and your fellow posters you mentioned that lowers the discourse then I will happily leave - as in I have seen plenty of shit turned out in your names so I’m pretty safe knowing I won’t need to leave.
But there does seem to be a bit of a meltdown by left posters - I get it, you’ve had years of sniping from the sidelines thinking your team would do it better and then in super quick truss time your team have been shown to be a bit shit. It’s like fancying some girl for ages, finally getting her back to yours, getting naked and finding she’s got a cock.
So don’t huff off just argue against our fake news, lies, stupidity and enjoy the superior glow.
We should all watch very carefully to see what this government does in Lord Alli's interests over the coming months and years.
He will an expectation of something, of that you can be sure.
Although I'm no defender of Alli or Labour, it'd be pretty unlucky if the Government did NOTHING that is in his interests in the course of the Government. I expect they'll do some things that are in my interests too, as well as some things that aren't.
You could also say the same about any donor to the Conservatives or individual figures over their period in office.
Correlation is not causation - although I wholly accept that the culture of political donations raises suspicions.
The thread header conjures up a scene in my mind of Neil Kinnock in 1992, turning his head sorrowfully towards Glenys, seconds after he had been told the result of the General Election exit poll.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Trump: For years they knocked the word "Tariff." The word, properly used, is a beautiful word. One of the most beautiful words I've ever heard. It is music to my ears… it will not cause inflation, by the way. https://x.com/Acyn/status/1838627746576306678
"It will not cause inflation, by the way..."
I don't disagree, it is a stupid policy and will be counter productive and probably recessionary too. But I suspect it is just electioneering and in office he will do something but it will be rather scaled back.
As for the farmers he was also telling them what they want to hear.
"The strategy is designed to protect American jobs from foreign competition, but economists warn his measures will boost inflation. Speaking to a gathering of farmers in a rural area outside of Pittsburgh, Trump also said he would press Chinese President Xi Jinping to honor a deal to purchase $50 billion of US agricultural goods. Farmers and industrial workers are a crucial part of Trump's coalition, and turning out these constituencies will be important if he is to beat Harris. That is especially true in Pennsylvania, where polls consistently show a razor-thin race."
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
He should pay income tax on that!
Without knowing the specifics - given that he has a 16 year old, I would guess at a residential sixth form college. Something like d’Overbroeck's.
Which, if he was paying the fees himself, would be out of post-tax income, and if paid for by an employer would be considered a benefit-in-kind by the taxman.
Despite Labour’s difficult Summer and self inflicted wounds, I would still say that Labour retain the strongest position of any of the parties. The Tories are currently the weakest by far.
Labour may have dug itself a 10ft hole, but the Tories are in the Mariana Trench.
I pretty much agree (though the Lob Dems may be in a better position than Labour, if only they were more visible...). But that does not excuse the hole that Labour have got themselves into, or the possibility that they will continue digging much deeper.
The problem is that these errors by Labour have been totally unforced. They're errors made by a combination of greed, hypocrisy, and not being very good at this politics lark.
I think it is a lot of ignorance about how things actually work. New Labour had an iron grip on the news cycle from the start. Carefully and deliberately built up over years.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Except that the jobs numbers were just revised down by over 800,000.
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
£20,000 for about a term's worth of accommodation is more than even schools like Eton charge. State boarding schools charge about £6000 or so a term.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
How are tariffs on Chinese imports and incentives for domestic manufacturing not the MAGA solution?
On the Labour vs PB Tories thing - Labour have made a terrible start. Objectively, obviously. Calling that out isn't bias, it just being awake.
The comedy bit is when people start saying that the previous governments were better, or that people will look at what Labour are doing and it will boost the Tories.
As we know, voters have very very long memories, and they're not going to forget the shambles of the last 9 or so years in a hurry. Better still, the Tories who are laughing at Labour are about to serve up a feast.
The Tory conference is already a binfire. A final 4 where the front runners are Really? And You're Kidding! Paraded in front of a Tory membership so disconnected from reality that they truly believe they did a Great Job in office. That Truss and Boris were cruelly ousted for no good reason. And that the best person to lead them forward is JENRICK.
PB Tories should remember that every member of every other party is cheering on JENRICK but not for the same reasons you are...
I don't think anybody here has claimed that Bojo was less venal than Starmer, but that doesn't mean the Starmer Government is automatically better in every area. Boris was widely mocked here for his 'boosterism' which was considered empty and meaningless. Well, now we've had a Government with a deliberate strategy of being negative about the fiscal and economic situation - how's that going? Not very well, judging by consumer confidence surveys and business investment decisions. Turns out a bit of 'boosterism' is actually not just more pleasant, but necessary.
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
£20,000 for about a term's worth of accommodation is more than even schools like Eton charge. State boarding schools charge about £6000 or so a term.
A fair number of the 6th form private college type places are £10k a term, residential.
Klouseau seems worried that it's going Trump's way.
No, he’s being diplomatic, as you have to be as PM . I get it you don’t like Starmer but even if Harris was miles ahead he’d stay clear of criticizing a presidential candidate.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
How are tariffs on Chinese imports and incentives for domestic manufacturing not the MAGA solution?
They don't directly benefit Trump or members of his family?
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
How are tariffs on Chinese imports and incentives for domestic manufacturing not the MAGA solution?
Among other things, MAGA isn't about incentives for domestic manufacturing.
Just tariffs, because in classic back-to-the-past fashion, they believe you can make the dastardly furriners pay so much that you can abolish the deficit *and* income tax.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
How are tariffs on Chinese imports and incentives for domestic manufacturing not the MAGA solution?
And why is it that PB shrewdies who would be appalled if the British Government ever announced such policies, clutching their pearls at the short-termist backward mercantilism and Little-Britainism of it all, think it's a blinding masterstroke when Biden does it?
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
£20,000 for about a term's worth of accommodation is more than even schools like Eton charge. State boarding schools charge about £6000 or so a term.
A fair number of the 6th form private college type places are £10k a term, residential.
Despite Labour’s difficult Summer and self inflicted wounds, I would still say that Labour retain the strongest position of any of the parties. The Tories are currently the weakest by far.
Labour may have dug itself a 10ft hole, but the Tories are in the Mariana Trench.
I pretty much agree (though the Lob Dems may be in a better position than Labour, if only they were more visible...). But that does not excuse the hole that Labour have got themselves into, or the possibility that they will continue digging much deeper.
The problem is that these errors by Labour have been totally unforced. They're errors made by a combination of greed, hypocrisy, and not being very good at this politics lark.
I think it is a lot of ignorance about how things actually work. New Labour had an iron grip on the news cycle from the start. Carefully and deliberately built up over years.
It's not just the case that he doesn't have a Campbell, it's that the news and commentariat market is so very different to the 90s that a Campbell-like grip just isn't possible.
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
£20,000 for about a term's worth of accommodation is more than even schools like Eton charge. State boarding schools charge about £6000 or so a term.
A fair number of the 6th form private college type places are £10k a term, residential.
So what was £20,000 spent on?
I don't know. Something pricey and private. Just trying to add what I do know, to the conversation.
Maybe it was more than one term - would seem strange to bundle a 6th former into a new school/educational environment for one term.
Despite Labour’s difficult Summer and self inflicted wounds, I would still say that Labour retain the strongest position of any of the parties. The Tories are currently the weakest by far.
Labour may have dug itself a 10ft hole, but the Tories are in the Mariana Trench.
I pretty much agree (though the Lob Dems may be in a better position than Labour, if only they were more visible...). But that does not excuse the hole that Labour have got themselves into, or the possibility that they will continue digging much deeper.
The problem is that these errors by Labour have been totally unforced. They're errors made by a combination of greed, hypocrisy, and not being very good at this politics lark.
I think it is a lot of ignorance about how things actually work. New Labour had an iron grip on the news cycle from the start. Carefully and deliberately built up over years.
It's not just the case that he doesn't have a Campbell, it's that the news and commentariat market is so very different to the 90s that a Campbell-like grip just isn't possible.
There is that. But there is no evidence of a news grid, carefully populated with stories for the various outlets to run with.
With the rise of distributed news, the amount of money that can be spent on stories by the press has dropped. Which creates an environment even more predisposed to running stories pre-written for them, for free....
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
£20,000 for about a term's worth of accommodation is more than even schools like Eton charge. State boarding schools charge about £6000 or so a term.
A fair number of the 6th form private college type places are £10k a term, residential.
So what was £20,000 spent on?
I don't know. Something pricey and private. Just trying to add what I do know, to the conversation.
Maybe it was more than one term - would seem strange to bundle a 6th former into a new school/educational environment for one term.
I suspect not just the term, but also somewhere to stay for the holidays.
IMHO this is the biggest donation scandal yet. It’s 20 times the scale of free football or concert tickets, for the direct personal benefit of the politician rather than towards campaign activity.
I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.
It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year. That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.
So no big deal.
You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
It's no conspiracy that anything or anyone that looks vaguely pro Trump is bullied or trash-talked. Which means many stay silent.
Fact.
No-one posting stuff supporting Trump winning the election gets bullied or trash talked. Posters who post stuff supporting Trumps views get challenged, perhaps trash talkeed but not bullied. Same as anyone posting marxist or Putinist stuff get challenged and perhaps trash talked.
Its what happens on a debating forum.
The snowflakes cannot handle it
You are allowed one (1) shot of the cask strength turnip juice.
Despite Labour’s difficult Summer and self inflicted wounds, I would still say that Labour retain the strongest position of any of the parties. The Tories are currently the weakest by far.
Labour may have dug itself a 10ft hole, but the Tories are in the Mariana Trench.
I pretty much agree (though the Lob Dems may be in a better position than Labour, if only they were more visible...). But that does not excuse the hole that Labour have got themselves into, or the possibility that they will continue digging much deeper.
The problem is that these errors by Labour have been totally unforced. They're errors made by a combination of greed, hypocrisy, and not being very good at this politics lark.
I think it is a lot of ignorance about how things actually work. New Labour had an iron grip on the news cycle from the start. Carefully and deliberately built up over years.
It's not just the case that he doesn't have a Campbell, it's that the news and commentariat market is so very different to the 90s that a Campbell-like grip just isn't possible.
There is that. But there is no evidence of a news grid, carefully populated with stories for the various outlets to run with.
With the rise of distributed news, the amount of money that can be spent on stories by the press has dropped. Which creates an environment even more predisposed to running stories pre-written for them, for free....
Yes you may no longer be able to control social media, but you can still have a pretty good go at telling BBC and Sky what is going to be the big story of the day, and send someone out to talk about it.
Klouseau seems worried that it's going Trump's way.
No, he’s being diplomatic, as you have to be as PM . I get it you don’t like Starmer but even if Harris was miles ahead he’d stay clear of criticizing a presidential candidate.
Third trip to the US since July 4, first meeting with Trump.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
How are tariffs on Chinese imports and incentives for domestic manufacturing not the MAGA solution?
And why is it that PB shrewdies who would be appalled if the British Government ever announced such policies, clutching their pearls at the short-termist backward mercantilism and Little-Britainism of it all, think it's a blinding masterstroke when Biden does it?
It is a fine line though. The tariff on Chinese EV's solar and batteries and other things can be seen as anti-dumping as they are targetted on specific products.
With Biden's tariffs you can argue 100% on EV's is too high and that makes the tariff more about protectionism than restricting dumping.
The EU have also taken the same approach with Chinese EV's.
I expect alot of it is more about allowing the domestic market to be able to catch up rather than truly being anti dumping.
Trump's proposal, and I am far from being one of this sites avid Harris fanboys here, simply boils down to protectionism as his general tariffs are applied across the board.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
How are tariffs on Chinese imports and incentives for domestic manufacturing not the MAGA solution?
You tell me, since the Republicans voted against the latter. With regard to tariffs, we've done this before a dozen or more times.
Trump is proposing a cross the board tariff on all imports. And claiming it won't be inflationary. The Democratic tariffs have been rather more targeted. Certainly they will (for example) deny the US cheap Chinese EVs - but without them the US auto industry is pretty well dead.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
How are tariffs on Chinese imports and incentives for domestic manufacturing not the MAGA solution?
And why is it that PB shrewdies who would be appalled if the British Government ever announced such policies, clutching their pearls at the short-termist backward mercantilism and Little-Britainism of it all, think it's a blinding masterstroke when Biden does it?
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.
The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
Here’s an exercise if you are bored today. Go through your posts in the Truss days and to the election, maybe do the same for your other hard done by posters, and just check that in no way have you typed out bollocks posts for either political point scoring or gain. Or even the three of you have not posted pointless posts that add nothing to the discourse.
If, when you have done this, you can honestly claim that you have done nothing but post interesting, non-biased, non-pointless nonsense then I for one will happily quit the site you can stay in your bubble.
Otherwise just shut the fick up and accept that PB is full of banter, argument, things you disagree with, people you disagree with and counter the arguments of you care so much or ignore the arguments of you don’t.
I don't believe I unnecessarily criticised Truss, as I recall I was greatly relieved that she managed the Queen's funeral arrangements rather than the embarrassment had Johnson done so, although you can spend as much time as you like proving me wrong. I spent plenty of hours deriding Johnson, but not with fake news with fact. Perhaps current discourse would be better served if some of those you are defending stuck to the same rules.
You have asked me to leave the site, otherwise you believe you can't stay. The posters who are making their rabid assertions aren't people I would choose to rub shoulders in reality, so perhaps I should do as you suggest and "stf up" although I believe unless you are really dim you realise you are the one advocating for a bubble of like-minded posters blowing smoke up each other's arses.
It's a shame a number of remaining posters aren't as bright as they seem to think they are.
Toodle pip.
Very strange take on what I wrote. I’m all for a plurality of views here and not the one calling for other people to leave but suggesting that those who do should check their own past behaviour.
We know both sides will post fake or dodgy news in defence of their side - sometimes seriously and sometimes trolling. It’s all part of the rich tapestry here and clearly you can tell what’s real and not.
I didn’t ask you to leave otherwise I can’t stay - I was making an offer that if you cannot find anything you and your fellow posters you mentioned that lowers the discourse then I will happily leave - as in I have seen plenty of shit turned out in your names so I’m pretty safe knowing I won’t need to leave.
But there does seem to be a bit of a meltdown by left posters - I get it, you’ve had years of sniping from the sidelines thinking your team would do it better and then in super quick truss time your team have been shown to be a bit shit. It’s like fancying some girl for ages, finally getting her back to yours, getting naked and finding she’s got a cock.
So don’t huff off just argue against our fake news, lies, stupidity and enjoy the superior glow.
Before I go, I have to respond to your bollocks,
The Starmer Government have made an awful start. You can make as much of that as you wish. Not least because they have done nothing rather than something.
Surely you chaps have enough to be going on with that rather than equalising PPE contracts fast lanes with Mrs Starmer's dress. I don't believe Mrs Starmer should be gifted clothing, however trying to equate that with Jenrick taking £10k for his party for overruling planning decisions for Richard Desmond is rubbish.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
How are tariffs on Chinese imports and incentives for domestic manufacturing not the MAGA solution?
And why is it that PB shrewdies who would be appalled if the British Government ever announced such policies, clutching their pearls at the short-termist backward mercantilism and Little-Britainism of it all, think it's a blinding masterstroke when Biden does it?
Asked and answered. Several times.
No one has taken me up on my sure fire winner on fracking - Invest in Malmesbury Fracking (all operations outsourced to Malmesbury Drill Baby Drill).
Free introductory offer - with each 100 shares, you get a free share in a bridge over the Thames. One careless owner.
If Trump loses narrowly in November - which is around a 50/50 chance - I suspect a fair few Republicans will reflect on the fact that a more disciplined, conventional Republican candidate would have won fairly comfortably. There is a strong message there that his campaign is begging him to stay focussed on, but the senile old bastard keeps straying off it into paranoia, dogs and delusion.
If he wins narrowly, I don't suppose they'll care. But their candidate has made it all more difficult than it needed to be.
I agree - if Trump wins, it will be because of stuff like this from the Trump campaign, and despite some of the more 'batshit' stuff from Trump himself, which at this point is doing him more harm than good I would have thought.
Next we’ll find out he accepted a large donation for private health care.
Seems Starmer's latest freebie admission of £20,000 for his son to study in a quiet environment was an 18 million pound penthouse in Covent Garden !!!!!
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
He should pay income tax on that!
Without knowing the specifics - given that he has a 16 year old, I would guess at a residential sixth form college. Something like d’Overbroeck's.
"Without knowing the specifics - I'll speculate wildly anyway".
In the register it says accomodation recieved over a period of 6 weeks from 7 days after the election was announced to just over a week after the election.
We know GCSE dates start on 5th May and finished on 20th June.
Plenty of hot house revision courses over Easter but residential revision in the middle of the exam season ? Don't think so.
Seem much more likely that the whole family decamped to one of Lord Alli's properties in London (or he paid the rent for a short term let.
Next we’ll find out he accepted a large donation for private health care.
Seems Starmer's latest freebie admission of £20,000 for his son to study in a quiet environment was an 18 million pound penthouse in Covent Garden !!!!!
Next we’ll find out he accepted a large donation for private health care.
Seems Starmer's latest freebie admission of £20,000 for his son to study in a quiet environment was an 18 million pound penthouse in Covent Garden !!!!!
Labour, the party of the working man and woman is now the party of the freeloader.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Except that the jobs numbers were just revised down by over 800,000.
When spread through the prior year, the average monthly job gain from April 2023 through March 2024 was 173,500 versus nearly 242,000, an analysis of BLS data shows...
...Wednesday’s preliminary downward revision was expected, economists say, noting the lagged but far more accurate Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, or QCEW, has shown a slower pace of job gains than the more timely, but less comprehensive, monthly employment surveys and estimates (*more on that methodology and the revision process later).
However, the size of the preliminary revision was a little surprising, said Ryan Sweet, chief US economist at Oxford Economics. He attributed that to how the BLS tries to capture new business formation and the closure of establishments (known as the birth-death model).
The pandemic had a seismic impact on the US economy and the labor market, and its aftershocks still linger to this day. New business applications surged, but with births come deaths, and the BLS’ model has been overstating the new business formation and understating deaths, Sweet told CNN.
To that end, “this is really just a counting issue” and a measurement issue versus a red flag about the health of the labor market, Torsten Slok, chief economist at Apollo Global Management, told CNN.
“160 million people have a job,” Slok said. ”Telling me that over the last 12 months it wasn’t 160 million, it was only 159.2 million is not making too much of a difference to how the Fed and financial markets are thinking about the economy.”
Other economists cautioned that Wednesday’s numbers are still preliminary (the final benchmark revisions will be released alongside the January jobs report in February 2025), and that while the QCEW does pick up some of the impact from the recent surge in immigration, it might not fully reflect undocumented workers.
While this rearview look suggests that job growth was softening a bit sooner than previously thought, the labor market was solid then, Sweet said. And it still has some good fundamentals going for it now, he added, noting that the unemployment rate increased because more people were looking for work (versus higher layoffs) and employment-to-population ratios remain high...
The softening jobs market is, of course, part of the rationale behind the interest rate cut.
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
He should pay income tax on that!
Without knowing the specifics - given that he has a 16 year old, I would guess at a residential sixth form college. Something like d’Overbroeck's.
"Without knowing the specifics - I'll speculate wildly anyway".
In the register it says accomodation recieved over a period of 6 weeks from 7 days after the election was announced to just over a week after the election.
We know GCSE dates start on 5th May and finished on 20th June.
Plenty of hot house revision courses over Easter but residential revision in the middle of the exam season ? Don't think so.
Seem much more likely that the whole family decamped to one of Lord Alli's properties in London (or he paid the rent for a short term let.
The slightly more challenging PB environment for lefties is the one downside of government switching from Con to Labour for a few years. But I can live with it.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
Which is one of the reason I like Biden's actual policies. He responded to the MAGA Right with an actual solution. Not the MAGA solution, but one that conformed to policies and philosophies of the party he led. And one that actually could (and did) work.
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
How are tariffs on Chinese imports and incentives for domestic manufacturing not the MAGA solution?
You tell me, since the Republicans voted against the latter. With regard to tariffs, we've done this before a dozen or more times.
Trump is proposing a cross the board tariff on all imports. And claiming it won't be inflationary. The Democratic tariffs have been rather more targeted. Certainly they will (for example) deny the US cheap Chinese EVs - but without them the US auto industry is pretty well dead.
Yes, they have been targetted but are they anti dumping measures or there to protect the domestic market and allow it to catch us. I suspect, given how large the tariffs are on EV's at 100% they are more about protectionism than anti dumping. Same with the EV's.
The other tariffs applied seem more reasonable although 25% on steel, aluminum, EV batteries, and other critical minerals at a time when demand globally is falling for these products can also been seen as protectionism.
Next we’ll find out he accepted a large donation for private health care.
Seems Starmer's latest freebie admission of £20,000 for his son to study in a quiet environment was an 18 million pound penthouse in Covent Garden !!!!!
I'm not sure putting a 16 year up in a flat in Covent Garden would be the strategy I would go for, if you wanted quiet for them to concentrate on exams.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.
The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
Here’s an exercise if you are bored today. Go through your posts in the Truss days and to the election, maybe do the same for your other hard done by posters, and just check that in no way have you typed out bollocks posts for either political point scoring or gain. Or even the three of you have not posted pointless posts that add nothing to the discourse.
If, when you have done this, you can honestly claim that you have done nothing but post interesting, non-biased, non-pointless nonsense then I for one will happily quit the site you can stay in your bubble.
Otherwise just shut the fick up and accept that PB is full of banter, argument, things you disagree with, people you disagree with and counter the arguments of you care so much or ignore the arguments of you don’t.
I don't believe I unnecessarily criticised Truss, as I recall I was greatly relieved that she managed the Queen's funeral arrangements rather than the embarrassment had Johnson done so, although you can spend as much time as you like proving me wrong. I spent plenty of hours deriding Johnson, but not with fake news with fact. Perhaps current discourse would be better served if some of those you are defending stuck to the same rules.
You have asked me to leave the site, otherwise you believe you can't stay. The posters who are making their rabid assertions aren't people I would choose to rub shoulders in reality, so perhaps I should do as you suggest and "stf up" although I believe unless you are really dim you realise you are the one advocating for a bubble of like-minded posters blowing smoke up each other's arses.
It's a shame a number of remaining posters aren't as bright as they seem to think they are.
Toodle pip.
Very strange take on what I wrote. I’m all for a plurality of views here and not the one calling for other people to leave but suggesting that those who do should check their own past behaviour.
We know both sides will post fake or dodgy news in defence of their side - sometimes seriously and sometimes trolling. It’s all part of the rich tapestry here and clearly you can tell what’s real and not.
I didn’t ask you to leave otherwise I can’t stay - I was making an offer that if you cannot find anything you and your fellow posters you mentioned that lowers the discourse then I will happily leave - as in I have seen plenty of shit turned out in your names so I’m pretty safe knowing I won’t need to leave.
But there does seem to be a bit of a meltdown by left posters - I get it, you’ve had years of sniping from the sidelines thinking your team would do it better and then in super quick truss time your team have been shown to be a bit shit. It’s like fancying some girl for ages, finally getting her back to yours, getting naked and finding she’s got a cock.
So don’t huff off just argue against our fake news, lies, stupidity and enjoy the superior glow.
Before I go, I have to respond to your bollocks,
The Starmer Government have made an awful start. You can make as much of that as you wish. Not least because they have done nothing rather than something.
Surely you chaps have enough to be going on with that rather than equalising PPE contracts fast lanes with Mrs Starmer's dress. I don't believe Mrs Starmer should be gifted clothing, however trying to equate that with Jenrick taking £10k for his party for overruling planning decisions for Richard Desmond is rubbish.
I just do not see why you should leave the site but it is Starmer and Labour who are in the media's 'gotcha' narrative, none more so than Sky, and that is not going to change no matter what misdemeanours the conservatives have committed
As for Jenrick I have no idea how he will manage if he is elected conservative leader, but I would expect he will attempt to neutralise Farage before move towards the centre, maybe a bit like Starmer
Next we’ll find out he accepted a large donation for private health care.
Seems Starmer's latest freebie admission of £20,000 for his son to study in a quiet environment was an 18 million pound penthouse in Covent Garden !!!!!
I honestly think Sir Keir is living on borrowed time. What is, rightly, spooking much of the Left is that if Labour screw up the electorate will turn not to the hapless Tories but to Reform. (This is probably why, for example, the Guardian is currently giving him no change.) Labour cannot afford to saddle itself with a PM who's politically incapable for the next five years. The stakes are just too high.
If Labour want to get a handle on the public finances the winter fuel allowance is only going to be the start of it. One of the big tests will be not cancelling the planned fuel duty increase.
If Labour wasn't too get a handle on the public finances the winter fuel allowance is only going to be the start of it. One of the big tests will be not cancelling the planned fuel duty increase.
People are used to paying 140ish for petrol so if we are going to do it now is a sensible time.
Talking to a guy who does cheap US road trips this morning who said this year what were 50 dollar motels are now 100 dollar motels.
It's the economy, stupid
And Trump's plan to solve the problem is... tariffs, raising prices even further.
Did you see his latest.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
To an audience of farmers ? Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
It is not just the farmers he is addressing though, it is the campaign as a whole and it got noticed. It has been over social media and on the news in the USA. It will certainly not do him any harm with voters whose jobs are being offshored. A message he is constantly getting over.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Manufacturing jobs being offshored to Mexico has been a theme in the flyover states ever since the NAFTA agreement was signed. It’s had a similar effect in Appalachia to the end of coal mining in Northern England in the ‘70s and ‘80s, with whole communities holllowed out and a feeling that no-one is speaking up for them.
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
Trump lost more manufacturing jobs than any president since Hoover. Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
I think this polling is fairly accurate and does tell a story of a poor start by Starmer and labour
The two issues to really cut through are the WFA (as we will see today as the unions debate their motion to reinstate it) and the freebies
You cannot get a worse optic then taking away pensioners WFA and the largesse of clothes, glasses, holidays, football and concert tickets showered by donors on the top labour team
I genuinely think this will not go away over the period of this parliament. but of course the next GE is 5 years away so anything could happen by then
I would just gently suggest to @Roger and @Anabobazina that trying to close down discussion on this forum because they are clearly dismayed is simply silly and maybe a 'cup of tea and a rich tea biscuit' would help
No one is closing down discussion. The complaint is posters like William Glenn promoting a narrative that has been dreamed up by the Daily Telegraph and claiming it as fact although it is not party policy and never will be, or Alanbrooke simply making a statement that "Reeves is c***" devalues the discourse.
The answer of course is for Anabob, Roger and myself to vacate the premises, a journey many already seem to have silently trod before.
Here’s an exercise if you are bored today. Go through your posts in the Truss days and to the election, maybe do the same for your other hard done by posters, and just check that in no way have you typed out bollocks posts for either political point scoring or gain. Or even the three of you have not posted pointless posts that add nothing to the discourse.
If, when you have done this, you can honestly claim that you have done nothing but post interesting, non-biased, non-pointless nonsense then I for one will happily quit the site you can stay in your bubble.
Otherwise just shut the fick up and accept that PB is full of banter, argument, things you disagree with, people you disagree with and counter the arguments of you care so much or ignore the arguments of you don’t.
I don't believe I unnecessarily criticised Truss, as I recall I was greatly relieved that she managed the Queen's funeral arrangements rather than the embarrassment had Johnson done so, although you can spend as much time as you like proving me wrong. I spent plenty of hours deriding Johnson, but not with fake news with fact. Perhaps current discourse would be better served if some of those you are defending stuck to the same rules.
You have asked me to leave the site, otherwise you believe you can't stay. The posters who are making their rabid assertions aren't people I would choose to rub shoulders in reality, so perhaps I should do as you suggest and "stf up" although I believe unless you are really dim you realise you are the one advocating for a bubble of like-minded posters blowing smoke up each other's arses.
It's a shame a number of remaining posters aren't as bright as they seem to think they are.
Toodle pip.
Very strange take on what I wrote. I’m all for a plurality of views here and not the one calling for other people to leave but suggesting that those who do should check their own past behaviour.
We know both sides will post fake or dodgy news in defence of their side - sometimes seriously and sometimes trolling. It’s all part of the rich tapestry here and clearly you can tell what’s real and not.
I didn’t ask you to leave otherwise I can’t stay - I was making an offer that if you cannot find anything you and your fellow posters you mentioned that lowers the discourse then I will happily leave - as in I have seen plenty of shit turned out in your names so I’m pretty safe knowing I won’t need to leave.
But there does seem to be a bit of a meltdown by left posters - I get it, you’ve had years of sniping from the sidelines thinking your team would do it better and then in super quick truss time your team have been shown to be a bit shit. It’s like fancying some girl for ages, finally getting her back to yours, getting naked and finding she’s got a cock.
So don’t huff off just argue against our fake news, lies, stupidity and enjoy the superior glow.
Before I go, I have to respond to your bollocks,
The Starmer Government have made an awful start. You can make as much of that as you wish. Not least because they have done nothing rather than something.
Surely you chaps have enough to be going on with that rather than equalising PPE contracts fast lanes with Mrs Starmer's dress. I don't believe Mrs Starmer should be gifted clothing, however trying to equate that with Jenrick taking £10k for his party for overruling planning decisions for Richard Desmond is rubbish.
I fear https://xkcd.com/386/ applies here and is going to interfere with your flounce
(Not that I, or I think many - if any - others want you to flounce. You just have to tolerate us all disagreeing and and chatting about all kinds of irrelevant nonsense if you decide to stay.)
I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.
It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year. That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.
So no big deal.
You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
It's no conspiracy that anything or anyone that looks vaguely pro Trump is bullied or trash-talked. Which means many stay silent.
Fact.
No-one posting stuff supporting Trump winning the election gets bullied or trash talked. Posters who post stuff supporting Trumps views get challenged, perhaps trash talkeed but not bullied. Same as anyone posting marxist or Putinist stuff get challenged and perhaps trash talked.
Its what happens on a debating forum.
The snowflakes cannot handle it
You are allowed one (1) shot of the cask strength turnip juice.
Malmesbury, it would kill me just now, I am suffering f from over indulgence last night. We had a paella night and far too much too drink, so recovering in the shade this.morning as it is very hot. May have to be shandy to start today.
Starmer clearly has a blind spot with his family, surprised even with his somewhat questionable political antenna I’m surprised he cannot see the political downside here.
If Labour wasn't too get a handle on the public finances the winter fuel allowance is only going to be the start of it. One of the big tests will be not cancelling the planned fuel duty increase.
People are used to paying 140ish for petrol so if we are going to do it now is a sensible time.
I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.
It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year. That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.
So no big deal.
You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
It's no conspiracy that anything or anyone that looks vaguely pro Trump is bullied or trash-talked. Which means many stay silent.
Fact.
No-one posting stuff supporting Trump winning the election gets bullied or trash talked. Posters who post stuff supporting Trumps views get challenged, perhaps trash talkeed but not bullied. Same as anyone posting marxist or Putinist stuff get challenged and perhaps trash talked.
Its what happens on a debating forum.
The snowflakes cannot handle it
You are allowed one (1) shot of the cask strength turnip juice.
Malmesbury, it would kill me just now, I am suffering f from over indulgence last night. We had a paella night and far too much too drink, so recovering in the shade this.morning as it is very hot. May have to be shandy to start today.
Are you on holiday Malc? Or is it unseasonably hot north of the border?
I note this hasn't had much discussion on here, because it's potentially "good" for Trump.
It's been discussed here ad nauseam, that had the GOP run a generic candidate rather than Trump, they'd likely have won this year. That Gallup piece is saying much the same thing.
So no big deal.
You need to let go the idea that there's some conspiracy of silence on PB.
It's no conspiracy that anything or anyone that looks vaguely pro Trump is bullied or trash-talked. Which means many stay silent.
Fact.
No-one posting stuff supporting Trump winning the election gets bullied or trash talked. Posters who post stuff supporting Trumps views get challenged, perhaps trash talkeed but not bullied. Same as anyone posting marxist or Putinist stuff get challenged and perhaps trash talked.
Its what happens on a debating forum.
The snowflakes cannot handle it
You are allowed one (1) shot of the cask strength turnip juice.
Malmesbury, it would kill me just now, I am suffering f from over indulgence last night. We had a paella night and far too much too drink, so recovering in the shade this.morning as it is very hot. May have to be shandy to start today.
Paella - chicken, seafood or a mix?
I am controversial in my family. I use chorizo in paella (seafood). My South American relatives love it - and demand I use it. The Spanish people I know are 50/50 interested/horrified.
Comments
It was an early version on Anyone-but-Corbyn.
In a First Among (US) Christians, Young Men Are More Religious Than Young Women
At Grace Church in Waco, Texas, the Generation Z gender divide can be seen in the pews. It has the potential to reshape both politics and family life.
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/23/us/young-men-religion-gen-z.html
If, when you have done this, you can honestly claim that you have done nothing but post interesting, non-biased, non-pointless nonsense then I for one will happily quit the site you can stay in your bubble.
Otherwise just shut the fick up and accept that PB is full of banter, argument, things you disagree with, people you disagree with and counter the arguments of you care so much or ignore the arguments of you don’t.
Then that outline plan would be refined and updated so you always have a good first stab in the file whenever the then PM fires the starting gun.
Good morning, everyone.
This time, single seat - Conservative vs LIb Dem vs Green vs Labour. The turnout went from 2,501 ballot papers issued to 1,785 so from 42% to 31%.
The Conservative vote held up - I'd argue those still willing to vote Conservative in 2023 were the core supporters who would come out to vote whatever. The LD vote halved numerically but was still decent - losing by just 11. The Green and Labour votes collapsed and in the absence of a Reform candidate, the Conservative won.
Good result, don't get me wrong, but slighlty unusual consequences. There have been hints in past weeks of a Conservative revival in local council by-elections (as you might expect) but it's far from a surge in Tory support, more what we often see under non-Conservative Governments, the Tory core vote comes out, it's much harder for other parties to get their support out (some of which clearly was anti-Conservative Government protest).
I expect plenty of good Conservative results in the coming weeks but we had this after 1997 - in 1998 the Conservatives gained 1300 seats for all the good it did them in 2001.
Asked about the donations, Sir Keir said that around £20,000 he had declared from Lord Alli for unspecified accommodation was for his teenager to study for exams in a “peaceful” atmosphere while the then-Labour leader was overwhelmed with media attention in the run-up to the election.
He should pay VAT on that.
You sound like a petulant teenager, if you don,t like a poster then skip it, don,t whine like a big baby
The answer is to accept sometimes politics is not to your liking
If Trump loses narrowly in November - which is around a 50/50 chance - I suspect a fair few Republicans will reflect on the fact that a more disciplined, conventional Republican candidate would have won fairly comfortably. There is a strong message there that his campaign is begging him to stay focussed on, but the senile old bastard keeps straying off it into paranoia, dogs and delusion.
If he wins narrowly, I don't suppose they'll care. But their candidate has made it all more difficult than it needed to be.
Of the 4 seats they hold are student lefty types and two are eco-NIMBY.
There is very little common ground between both types and look at the furious reaction from the student lefty types when the hapless Carla Denyer tweeted praising Joe Biden when he stood down. Suffice to say she collapsed like a house of cards under the pressure of a few angry tweets.
The Green Party, as it gains more seats and more councils, will move from playing at politics and opposing for the sake of it to having to deliver and having to compromise.
John Deere are looking at moving some tractor production to Mexico.
Trump has told them to reconsider or when he is elected President it will be 200% tariffs.
I guess it is good politics though.
Questionable. (Also economically bananas.)
Note that he's also declaring unchecked power to bypass Congress on tariffs.
Nature abhors a vacuum is an expression I am hearing a lot from political commentators.
So yes, it is good politics in my view.
Also, as I have said before, I think his policies on Tariffs is crazy already. We need less restrictions to trade not more.
Absolutely. It was a huge unforced error to allow this summer to be dominated by WFA. Some have argued that it had to be done asap for technical reasons, so maybe they had no choice. But they have a hell of a lot of lost political ground to make up now.
Actually I was vaguely aware of Margaret Thatcher before that. But not really in a 'political' way.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1838627746576306678
"It will not cause inflation, by the way..."
Which is why Trump is telling manufacturers he’ll be putting tarrifs on companies who relocate American jobs to Mexico.
You have asked me to leave the site, otherwise you believe you can't stay. The posters who are making their rabid assertions aren't people I would choose to rub shoulders in reality, so perhaps I should do as you suggest and "stf up" although I believe unless you are really dim you realise you are the one advocating for a bubble of like-minded posters blowing smoke up each other's arses.
It's a shame a number of remaining posters aren't as bright as they seem to think they are.
Toodle pip.
He will an expectation of something, of that you can be sure.
There's no doubt in my mind, absent the Falklands Conflict, the 1982 locals would have been a bloodbath for the Conservatives in London and elsewhere. It's quite possible Bruce Douglas-Mann would have won Mitcham & Morden strengthening the Alliance in London and causing further disquiet in the Conservatives which could have continued to the Party Conference later that year.
I very much doubt you would have seen a 144-seat landslide in the next election and a much smaller majority might have caused problems in pushing through the radical second term agenda with the privatisations.
It's just not as simple as the Conservatives would have won anyway and everything would have carried on as we know it.
We know that if the Falklands War happened, Thatcher would have won by a landslide... because it DID happen, and she DID win by a landslide.
We don't know with certainty what would have happened if the Falklands War didn't happen, because we don't live in the world where it didn't.
It seems quite plausible to me that the Tories would've won pretty comfortably as Labour were in a weak position, the novelty of the SDP was wearing off, and the economy was improving in some respects. But none of us can ever know that with absolute certainty as the hypothesis was not and never can be tested.
https://www.christianitytoday.com/2021/09/trump-evangelical-identity-pew-research-survey-presidency/
This Church is Southern Baptist, so is Evangelical in style.
Whatever the optics are appalling after all the sledging of Tories over sleaze.
Yet his government wants to cause other families with kids in school, or doing exams, untold disruption by adding VAT onto school fees?
Labour may have dug itself a 10ft hole, but the Tories are in the Mariana Trench.
This 20k to move my boy to a different part of Hampstead stuff is as precious as it gets.
Biden is actually bringing them back. To flyover states.
The problem is that these errors by Labour have been totally unforced. They're errors made by a combination of greed, hypocrisy, and not being very good at this politics lark.
We know both sides will post fake or dodgy news in defence of their side - sometimes seriously and sometimes trolling. It’s all part of the rich tapestry here and clearly you can tell what’s real and not.
I didn’t ask you to leave otherwise I can’t stay - I was making an offer that if you cannot find anything you and your fellow posters you mentioned that lowers the discourse then I will happily leave - as in I have seen plenty of shit turned out in your names so I’m pretty safe knowing I won’t need to leave.
But there does seem to be a bit of a meltdown by left posters - I get it, you’ve had years of sniping from the sidelines thinking your team would do it better and then in super quick truss time your team have been shown to be a bit shit. It’s like fancying some girl for ages, finally getting her back to yours, getting naked and finding she’s got a cock.
So don’t huff off just argue against our fake news, lies, stupidity and enjoy the superior glow.
You could also say the same about any donor to the Conservatives or individual figures over their period in office.
Correlation is not causation - although I wholly accept that the culture of political donations raises suspicions.
"What is it Neil?"
"Love, Labour's lost."
As for the farmers he was also telling them what they want to hear.
"The strategy is designed to protect American jobs from foreign competition, but economists warn his measures will boost inflation. Speaking to a gathering of farmers in a rural area outside of Pittsburgh, Trump also said he would press Chinese President Xi Jinping to honor a deal to purchase $50 billion of US agricultural goods. Farmers and industrial workers are a crucial part of Trump's coalition, and turning out these constituencies will be important if he is to beat Harris. That is especially true in Pennsylvania, where polls consistently show a razor-thin race."
That is good politics in action, if anyone cares to look.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/dereksaul/2024/08/21/us-added-818000-fewer-jobs-than-previously-thought-from-march-2023-to-march-2024-government-says/
https://budget.house.gov/press-release/-818000-fewer-jobs-added-to-the-economy-than-previously-reported
And clearly theres large manufacturing companies still making suggestions about moving jobs the other way.
Klouseau seems worried that it's going Trump's way.
Just tariffs, because in classic back-to-the-past fashion, they believe you can make the dastardly furriners pay so much that you can abolish the deficit *and* income tax.
Maybe it was more than one term - would seem strange to bundle a 6th former into a new school/educational environment for one term.
With the rise of distributed news, the amount of money that can be spent on stories by the press has dropped. Which creates an environment even more predisposed to running stories pre-written for them, for free....
IMHO this is the biggest donation scandal yet. It’s 20 times the scale of free football or concert tickets, for the direct personal benefit of the politician rather than towards campaign activity.
With Biden's tariffs you can argue 100% on EV's is too high and that makes the tariff more about protectionism than restricting dumping.
The EU have also taken the same approach with Chinese EV's.
I expect alot of it is more about allowing the domestic market to be able to catch up rather than truly being anti dumping.
Trump's proposal, and I am far from being one of this sites avid Harris fanboys here, simply boils down to protectionism as his general tariffs are applied across the board.
With regard to tariffs, we've done this before a dozen or more times.
Trump is proposing a cross the board tariff on all imports. And claiming it won't be inflationary.
The Democratic tariffs have been rather more targeted. Certainly they will (for example) deny the US cheap Chinese EVs - but without them the US auto industry is pretty well dead.
The Starmer Government have made an awful start. You can make as much of that as you wish. Not least because they have done nothing rather than something.
Surely you chaps have enough to be going on with that rather than equalising PPE contracts fast lanes with Mrs Starmer's dress. I don't believe Mrs Starmer should be gifted clothing, however trying to equate that with Jenrick taking £10k for his party for overruling planning decisions for Richard Desmond is rubbish.
Free introductory offer - with each 100 shares, you get a free share in a bridge over the Thames. One careless owner.
In the register it says accomodation recieved over a period of 6 weeks from 7 days after the election was announced to just over a week after the election.
We know GCSE dates start on 5th May and finished on 20th June.
Plenty of hot house revision courses over Easter but residential revision in the middle of the exam season ?
Don't think so.
Seem much more likely that the whole family decamped to one of Lord Alli's properties in London (or he paid the rent for a short term let.
Malmesbury
D minus
Get prone to flights of fancy.
Must try harder.
From the link provided by that Congressional press release:
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/21/economy/bls-jobs-revisions/index.html
..The preliminary data marks the largest downward revision since 2009 and shows that the labor market wasn’t quite as red hot as initially thought. However, job growth was still historically strong.
When spread through the prior year, the average monthly job gain from April 2023 through March 2024 was 173,500 versus nearly 242,000, an analysis of BLS data shows...
...Wednesday’s preliminary downward revision was expected, economists say, noting the lagged but far more accurate Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, or QCEW, has shown a slower pace of job gains than the more timely, but less comprehensive, monthly employment surveys and estimates (*more on that methodology and the revision process later).
However, the size of the preliminary revision was a little surprising, said Ryan Sweet, chief US economist at Oxford Economics. He attributed that to how the BLS tries to capture new business formation and the closure of establishments (known as the birth-death model).
The pandemic had a seismic impact on the US economy and the labor market, and its aftershocks still linger to this day. New business applications surged, but with births come deaths, and the BLS’ model has been overstating the new business formation and understating deaths, Sweet told CNN.
To that end, “this is really just a counting issue” and a measurement issue versus a red flag about the health of the labor market, Torsten Slok, chief economist at Apollo Global Management, told CNN.
“160 million people have a job,” Slok said. ”Telling me that over the last 12 months it wasn’t 160 million, it was only 159.2 million is not making too much of a difference to how the Fed and financial markets are thinking about the economy.”
Other economists cautioned that Wednesday’s numbers are still preliminary (the final benchmark revisions will be released alongside the January jobs report in February 2025), and that while the QCEW does pick up some of the impact from the recent surge in immigration, it might not fully reflect undocumented workers.
While this rearview look suggests that job growth was softening a bit sooner than previously thought, the labor market was solid then, Sweet said. And it still has some good fundamentals going for it now, he added, noting that the unemployment rate increased because more people were looking for work (versus higher layoffs) and employment-to-population ratios remain high...
The softening jobs market is, of course, part of the rationale behind the interest rate cut.
You seem upset. Why?
The other tariffs applied seem more reasonable although 25% on steel, aluminum, EV batteries, and other critical minerals at a time when demand globally is falling for these products can also been seen as protectionism.
As for Jenrick I have no idea how he will manage if he is elected conservative leader, but I would expect he will attempt to neutralise Farage before move towards the centre, maybe a bit like Starmer
@HYUFD is the best commentator on this subject
Edit technically a week after the election was called and a week after the election.
I can understand why he would want to be out of the public eye during that period.
I have said before Sunak and Starmer are very similar in that they are both terrible at politics
USA manufacturing jobs:
2016 14.8m
2017 14.7m
2018 14.9m
2019 15.1m
2020 13.9m
2021 14.1m
2022 14.6m
2023 14.9m
https://www.statista.com/statistics/664993/private-sector-manufacturing-employment-in-the-us/
Manufacturing jobs increased under Trump until covid hit. The million jobs lost because of covid have slowly returned.
Jobs were lost for similar reasons to why prices have risen - outside events.
Both would have happened whoever was in government at the time.
(Not that I, or I think many - if any - others want you to flounce. You just have to tolerate us all disagreeing and and chatting about all kinds of irrelevant nonsense if you decide to stay.)
https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/were-some-subpostmaster-discrepancies-down-to-internal-fraud/
Was deliberate, internal fraud being perpetrated *against* the SPMs?
We have exchanged one dud for another dud, with similar policy outlooks.
I am controversial in my family. I use chorizo in paella (seafood). My South American relatives love it - and demand I use it. The Spanish people I know are 50/50 interested/horrified.