Categories
Last night’s debate brings no happy ending for Bobby J – politicalbetting.com
Last night’s debate brings no happy ending for Bobby J – politicalbetting.com
Last night’s debate is set to be the only debate between the gruesome twosome that are Jenrick and Badenoch, so there’s not much opportunity for Jenrick to turn things around. Punters are clear who won last night.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Both candidates are pretty flawed. They may reveal hidden depths once in the role, the Prince Hal to King Henry transition that Johnson (especially) failed to do. But Jenrick's awful aura is too obvious, and Badenoch is too prone to saying things that sound like policies but would repel the electorate if they became so.
Neither of them really passes the "could you imagine them as Prime Minister?" test, but few do. Corbyn failed it badly, as did IDS. Cameron and Starmer both passed it, whatever their other flaws. It's not a sufficient condition for success (May, Brown and Sunak were plausible, but fell apart quickly) but it is necessary.
And the risk for the Conservatives is that, if Jenrick loses this time, he will be in a stronger position to take over in the event that Badenoch blows up in a couple of years.
If that is possible.
At a time when total immigration numbers are falling sharply, making leaving the ECHR a shibboleth for the Parliamentary Party is not only divisive, it highlights the abject failure of Tory immigration policy when in office. If Bobby J wants to remind everyone about his nasty removal of cartoon murals in children´s refugee centres he could hardly do more to highlight it.
Generic is nasty, but Kemi is nuts.
Cleverly could be leader within 2 years. The merely adequate is still better than the obvious losers.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/oct/17/kemikaze-and-honest-bob-are-let-loose-on-gb-news-where-they-cant-do-any-harm
The practice from at least the last eight years of blaming the ECHR and our judiciary for stuff the government/Conservative party fail to get right and don't invest in, like law and order, is far more damaging than leaving the ECHR would be.
Ideally a party that gave both investment and thought to law and order within the ECHR framework, and hopefully we get that with Starmer (we shall see) so it becomes moot.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm24q3204y3o
Killing Yahya Sinwar is Israel's biggest victory so far in the war against Hamas in Gaza.
His death is a serious blow for Hamas, the organisation he turned into a fighting force that inflicted the biggest defeat on the state of Israel in its history.
Saying 7 October 2023 was a defeat for Israel (and a victory for Palestine?) is an interesting way of describing it; however, it arguably takes the emotion out of the whole issue. There's a war going on and all's fair etc. etc.
Un the last two Tests he has dropped a routine catch, missed the simplest of stumpings and done very little with the bat. You have to wonder who picked him and why.
Is there a replacement out there or do they have to send home for one?
The Labour Party.
One question is how will this change Bobby J's tactics?
Apparently why cities like Copenhagen and Amsterdam feel calmer. And Paris now too.
That Hamas are still fighting, and the IDF still having to endlessly retake buildings, many multiple times is another victory for Hamas. It's an astonishing feat considering the Israeli blockade, overwhelming force, control of the air, land, sea and electronic media.
Hamas are horrendous terrorists, but clearly very resilient fighters.
Yom Kippur similarly saw rapid reversals for Israel at the start coupled with a difficult time regaining lost ground towards the end.
Strategically, it's been a disaster. It's cost them a load of goodwill, empowered the Israeli far right and left them with a very awkward series of conversations to have with states that formerly wanted them as allies.
The parallels to Yom Kippur (and not just the date) get more and more obvious.
Hopefully another parallel will be the subsequent rapid defenestration of the government. But this time I doubt if a peacemaker will be the replacement.
I saw it here first and have been using it ("flies into things at random and blows herself up"), but where was it coined?
Kemi would be better at PMQs, but pretty hopeless at reorganising the party into a winning machine. Jenrick is more organised and driven. A bit Michavelian at times, but that is sometimes needed in a politician. I am not convinced that either will last to the next GE.
I note too that after a poor start Labour are beginning to get organised on presentation and delivery. They cannot be written off yet.
I would say that the biggest defeat for Israel in its history was perhaps in Southern Lebanon in 2006, when the IDF went for Hezbollah and withdrew not having met objectives with 140 dead and 1200 wounded. It tarnished the IDF aura of invincibility.
I reckon the Tories have about two.
And India are 356 behind on first innings. This is also known by the technical term of 'fucked.'
They're saying she's not nearly as bad as Jenrick.
And this is true. Jenrick is somebody whom Tyrion Lannister would describe in blunt terms, and I would only disagree because I would feel it's a bit harsh on c...
Kemi certainly gives the impression of believing her own farts smell of Chanel No 5.
All it means is that you are prejudiced towards favouring white middle aged men as prime ministers
A lot of people could not imagine Thatcher - a lower middle class woman! - as PM. She turned out to be the best in generations. Starmer had a certain prime ministerial quality before gaining office - he was a senior lawyer - but it turns out he is terrible at it, a proper disaster, and has the worst early polling of any PM who ever won an election
From this we should learn that You really cannot tell
Jenrick or Badenoch are both so young and untested they add an extra layer of doubt. But they will have years as LOTO to give us a clue
And that’s the other point. The Tories are out of power for 4-5 years. They aren’t choosing a PM. They are choosing someone who can stick it to Skyr and rally the party
"More than a quarter of shops in Boston, Lincolnshire, lie empty and retailers are calling for urgent support. But some local leaders believe the answer is to pivot to leisure and heritage in search of a "new identity". The BBC spent a day in the town to ask what the future might have in store.
Boston bears the scars of its retail casualties.
A short walk through the town centre to the Market Place takes in empty shop after empty shop – some boarded up, others with "to let" signs propped up in the windows.
Look beyond the signs and there are bare walls with tell-tale marks where display cabinets have been ripped away.
"There won't be a town centre in five years if we continue the way that we are," says Lisa Fitzgerald, who manages the Pescod Square shopping centre."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c07n15zm430o
Kemi is a treatable STI whereas Jenrick is an untreatable STI.
You just don’t hear growling petrol engines so much. And you really notice those that do - eg vrooming motorbikes
That's interesting, and I disagree. I'd say that Type I does meet the EA2010 definition, and Type II does sometimes. Without rabbit-holing for case law around "long term effects of progressive diseases under EA2010" and so on, I sometimes see Type I used as an example condition, including by Government, and this is from the CAB webpage:
Example
Tom has type 1 diabetes. He has to monitor his glucose levels and give himself insulin injections several times a day. If he controls his glucose levels, he doesn’t usually have any symptoms.
He's disabled because without the correct dose of insulin, the diabetes would have a substantial long-term adverse effect on his normal day-to-day activities.
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/work/discrimination-at-work/dealing-with-discrimination-at-work/checking-if-its-discrimination/check-if-youre-disabled-under-the-equality-act-work/
But it's important to distinguish between that and disability benefits, where eligibility for some benefits is based more on functional criteria (eg around how far can you walk for a Blue Badge), not "are you disabled". This is afaik different from most other European countries.
On disabled MPs, aside from Type I diabetes, there are dozens of MPs who have been excluded by lurid claims of the type "only 1% of MPs are disabled, but 20% of the population." I could post a list, but it's the principle not the detail here. My main concern here is that such feed into the public mind a concept of "that group over there that are disabled who we help a bit" rather than "part of 'us' who happen to need support at this time"; that is textbook practical 'othering' based around the medical model of disability.
There was an interesting piece on Disability News Service back in August where they got at "how many MPs have asked for reasonable adjustments due to their disability", which came up with numbers of 43 have had discussions, and 28 had had adjustments under EA2010. Better numbers, but journos being journos the story then became "4 times as many disabled MPs".
https://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/house-of-commons-has-many-more-disabled-mps-than-previously-thought-heartening-new-figures-show/
The other is HIV, which can be controlled but never eradicated, and which most sufferers don't get treated early enough as they don't know they're carrying it.
1 Electric vehicles: As you mentioned, the increasing adoption of electric cars, buses, and other vehicles is reducing traffic noise. Electric motors are much quieter than internal combustion engines.
2. Improved road surfaces: Many cities are using noise-reducing asphalt and other materials that help dampen traffic sounds.
3. Noise regulations: Stricter noise pollution laws and enforcement in many urban areas have led to reductions in allowable noise levels for vehicles, construction, and other activities; also lower speed limits are likewise contributing
4. Technological improvements: Even traditional vehicles are becoming quieter due to advances in engine design and noise reduction technologies.
*adds Jenrick to the space cannon ammunition list*
Freeze/thaw cycles + ever heavier vehicles is not a good mix.
I still go with "loose cannon" for KemiKaze.
(Good morning, Mr Grace - borrowing a line from Mrs Slocombe's Pussy.)
So the fix is probably the one suggested a year or so back - if a shop is empty for more than x months there should be an open auction with the highest bidder given a lease...
But one problem a lot of town centres have is more shops than is needed when more things are purchased online and people can only afford so many £4 coffees a week (and if you are on the minimum wage not many at all).
Japan was saved from devastation. So a kamikaze is a good war winning thing - a war winning miracle - which is why they applied it to the suicide pilots in WW2. They hoped for another miracle against a vastly superior force
https://bsky.app/profile/newseye.bsky.social/post/3l65qz6dnlm25
What was that silly remark I made about India?
I'm sure that there is record of complaints from the 1920s or 1930s, though by then campaigning by the Cyclists' Touring Club had long been working on it via groups such as the Roads Improvement Association - set up in 1882.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roads_Improvement_Association
(Background: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/bike-blog/2011/aug/15/cyclists-paved-way-for-roads)
Otoh, the new Uniqlo is heaving, and it's where I buy most of my clothes. The outdoor and specialist shops on Rose Street are doing ok, and other "High Streets" in Stockbridge, Morningside, Leith, Portobello are very busy. Perhaps it's just that the big traditional brands are a bit shite.
More broadly won't a lack of noise from vehicles be detrimental to 3 groups - cats, children and the visually impaired ?
But is there a particular housing shortage in Boston? You do need a balance of employment space (which may well not be retail space, of course) and accommodation for a town to be reasonably prosperous. It's not clear to me that Boston is a boom town where there are loads of job opportunities if only anyone could find somewhere to live.
Saying "The business is worth 25% of what it used to be", is a way to get fired.
Plus banks put into a lot of loans on commercial property that rents could not go down..... So the property "owners"* have no choice.
Plus a whole chunk of the economy is based on the value of commercial rents. A slow, piecemeal realisation of the results maybe the best we can hope for. Unless you want another banking crisis....
*Often geared up to the point the bank owns the property and they are a front man.
The problem is that in the end, bland commercialisation always kills it - see Carnaby Street in London.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Myeongnyang
However I did reach a similar conclusion a while back that it will be possible to live on a main road in the future in the way you can't at the moment. Especially if it's a county lane once motorbikes go electric (in the Dales that is where the noise comes from).
Most retail is a dinosaur technology and exactly the kind of inefficient use of land, labour and capital that the creative destruction of capitalism is best at disposing of so that the resources can be put to better use.
The banking implications, if any, are what we have a lender of last resort for. A quick crisis that is resolved is better than endless, slow decline. What matters is that the inputs used can be redeployed more efficiently as quickly as possible.
As an aside, Mrs J thinks I'm weird because I love the smell of hot tarmac, e.g. when it is being laid.
In that case, it didn't happen and solutions were found. For places like Boston, Clacton, Great Yarmouth... what exactly are they for in the 21st Century? Too small to be commercial hubs and too remote to be commuter bases. And we have easier access to nicer holiday resorts.
It’s a bit like the centrist dads and their smart watches
10 years ago cycling down my road I used to see piles of soot near the traffic lights where DPFs had dumped under acceleration, that seems to have stopped as the technology improved.