Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Could becoming a republic be the only way to keep Scotland in the Union? – politicalbetting.com

12467

Comments

  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,069

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @sturdyAlex

    And so it begins.

    This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

    There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

    https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

    Yes, the big fights next year are going to be if Trump can get his cost-cutting agenda past a Congress wholly owned and sponsored by the big donors and lobbyists.

    The past couple of days have been an early example of what the next few months is going to bring. It’s going to be fascinating to watch (from a distance of many time zones!).
    Who are Trump and Musk owned by? Other big donors, lobbyists, and foreign entities.
    Trump maybe, Musk isn't. He's worth $447 Bn. Even if you take the value of say X down to zero he's still the richest man on the planet by a distance. ITAR regulations mean SpaceX is pretty much entirely American in fact and law.
    Yeah, the idea Musk is “owned by lobbyists and foreign entities” is quite sensationally dumb even by the standards of PB’s resident mental tardigrade, @JosiasJessop

    The reason so many - esp on the left - fear and loathe Musk is because he is extremely wealthy and powerful in his own right. Autonomous
    Agree. He's completely beyond the law and democracy but is shaping the future of the US. That's why "they" are probably going to have to kill him,.
    Possibly. It’s incredible how quickly we’ve memory holed the two sassytempts on Trump. One of which made him bleed and was 2cm from killing him
    The fucking useless Ukrainians used Fiverr.
    I’m glad you agree with my theory it was the Ukrainians. One day it will be revealed
    It wasn’t the Ukranians. The Ukranian assassination attempts are successful, and they use bombs rather than guns.
    But they have to be a tad more discreet taking out a US president in the USA
    They wouldn’t use a 20-year-old idiot who couldn’t even make his own school’s shooting team, trying to take the shot from 100 yards away on the roof of the bulding the police were using as their base for the day; they’d have used a serious ex-military sniper from half a mile, out of sight of the USSS and likely to get away before they could find him.
    No they wouldn’t. Think about it. If they used a pro and he got caught with links to Kyiv imagine the firestorm. All US aid would have ended instantly. And worse

    They had to find a dumb clean skin incel who was so stupid he thought he’d survive the sassytempt, coz that hot blonde Eastern European girl in the bar persuaded him so

    Jeez. It’s almost like you guys have never plotted thrillers
    The Ukranian government would have to be insane and/or incompetent not to kill DJT if they had the chance. I mean, why wouldn't they? If they thought they could.
    But of course. Who, overwhelmingly, has the money means men motivation and militaristic mindset to take out Trump? The Ukrainians

    FFS the second sassytempt was some nutter who actually fought for Ukraine, even as they now urgently disown him
    He didn’t. He tried to get involved, but was turned down as a useless nutter.
    Leon doesn't let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory. He thinks using 'facts' is something low-IQ people do... ;)
    Why do you do these cringe inducing emojis at the end of your comments? It doesn’t add anything and just makes you look like a prat
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

    That also makes you a fucking wanker.
    Indeed so. But a fucking wanker who is a good deal smarter than you
    Can we have a citation or two in order to demonstrate your genius? You can't just claim world beating intellect when we have struggled on PB for years to find any prior evidence.
    I am literally paid to go on free holidays to luxury hotels in beautiful sunny places
    Yes, you are a paid sex tourist.
    Nice work if you can get it?
    Not really. It'd probably be a very soulless and empty lifestyle, at least from my perspective. Which might be why he tries to make his life out to be so brilliant; because it is actually so empty...
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited December 20
    Leon said:

    dixiedean said:

    Leon said:

    Has anyone else got this stupid lurgy? Several of my friends have. And now me

    It’s quite weird. In some ways it’s mild. No sore throat, no muscle aches. Not enough to keep you in bed (unless you want), but lots of sneezing and deep coughing and a definite yuk feeling and, worse, it really drags on

    We all report similar symptoms

    My mother has had it since the weekend.
    I’ve just heard from ANOTHER friend

    “Yeah let's see about after Xmas. I still feel shit. COld sort of gone but not quite from the chest or the head. Sneezy”

    Exactly the same. Odd
    People getting colds and flu over Christmas? Close the nightclubs immediately. And don't re-open them.

    And while PB is speaking (or at least thinking, surely) of me, I have just come back from NYC. Some observations:

    Yes everything is super expensive as you noted, in my case this was most apparent with books (2x the price in Barnes & Noble vs amazon.co.uk).

    Tipping has indeed gone bonkers. Buy a tall decaf Americano leave room for milk (the way I roll) in Starbucks and you are presented with 3x tip options (and no no tip option).

    New Yorkers are overwhelmingly polite "on the street".

    There is just so much food around; when you order anything, enough to feed three people arrives.

    Notwithstanding the many pro-Palestinian protests we see on social media in eg campuses in the US, New York is a very Jewish city. Huge "Jewish" universities and medical centres and endowed buildings/institutions. There is only one way that US sympathies will go in the Middle East. One poster on the way to the airport proclaimed "we teach our children to Love America" or somesuch.

    But more importantly to the "wither the UK" debate we have on here de temps en temps, New York is just so vibrant and relevant and important. London felt like a second cousin in comparison. Not just because they have POTUS, and everything is bigger, but because you realise that if it doesn't happen in the US it doesn't happen. Or matter much.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,144
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

    That also makes you a fucking wanker.
    Hardly breaking news.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    pm215 said:

    Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

    It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

    It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.
    That is an appalling post.

    Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

    To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.
    I think it's pretty dubious of the EU to be putting loyalty clauses into their pension schemes in the first place, really. My employer doesn't get to yank back their contributions to my pension if I leave and go work for a competitor.
    Such clauses and high-handedness is precisely why we Remainers think the EU can be its own worst enemy (and why the UK had such a privileged position, or would have, had Dave's deal been implemented).
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,811
    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @sturdyAlex

    And so it begins.

    This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

    There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

    https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

    Yes, the big fights next year are going to be if Trump can get his cost-cutting agenda past a Congress wholly owned and sponsored by the big donors and lobbyists.

    The past couple of days have been an early example of what the next few months is going to bring. It’s going to be fascinating to watch (from a distance of many time zones!).
    Who are Trump and Musk owned by? Other big donors, lobbyists, and foreign entities.
    Trump maybe, Musk isn't. He's worth $447 Bn. Even if you take the value of say X down to zero he's still the richest man on the planet by a distance. ITAR regulations mean SpaceX is pretty much entirely American in fact and law.
    Yeah, the idea Musk is “owned by lobbyists and foreign entities” is quite sensationally dumb even by the standards of PB’s resident mental tardigrade, @JosiasJessop

    The reason so many - esp on the left - fear and loathe Musk is because he is extremely wealthy and powerful in his own right. Autonomous
    Agree. He's completely beyond the law and democracy but is shaping the future of the US. That's why "they" are probably going to have to kill him,.
    Possibly. It’s incredible how quickly we’ve memory holed the two sassytempts on Trump. One of which made him bleed and was 2cm from killing him
    The fucking useless Ukrainians used Fiverr.
    I’m glad you agree with my theory it was the Ukrainians. One day it will be revealed
    It wasn’t the Ukranians. The Ukranian assassination attempts are successful, and they use bombs rather than guns.
    But they have to be a tad more discreet taking out a US president in the USA
    They wouldn’t use a 20-year-old idiot who couldn’t even make his own school’s shooting team, trying to take the shot from 100 yards away on the roof of the bulding the police were using as their base for the day; they’d have used a serious ex-military sniper from half a mile, out of sight of the USSS and likely to get away before they could find him.
    No they wouldn’t. Think about it. If they used a pro and he got caught with links to Kyiv imagine the firestorm. All US aid would have ended instantly. And worse

    They had to find a dumb clean skin incel who was so stupid he thought he’d survive the sassytempt, coz that hot blonde Eastern European girl in the bar persuaded him so

    Jeez. It’s almost like you guys have never plotted thrillers
    Real life isn’t a thriller though. This guy was awfully lucky that he got as far he did before being taken out, and that the various police there on the day couldn’t talk to each other particularly well.

    A serious state-sponsored attempt on the life of the President would have been done very differently, and the sniper could have very quickly been disappeared because they’d planned half a dozen different escape routes in advance.
    “Awfully lucky” is one way of putting it…
    I suspect we might see a serious investigation of it next year. A shooter on the roof of the police staging area building, 100 yards from the stage, should be utterly incomprehensible.

    One inch to the right, and the last six months of American history would be very different.
    He wasn’t “awfully lucky”. I don’t believe in amazing “incomprehensible” luck. He was assisted, at the very least by local cops

    “In Pennsylvania, particularly in cities like Philadelphia and smaller towns across the state, there is a long-established Ukrainian American community. Pennsylvania has the 2nd largest Ukrainian population in the United States due to waves of immigration that began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, as well as post-World War II.”
    Yeah, right. Problem with this hypothesis is that instead of President Trump the Ukrainians get President JD Vance who's even more hostile to Kiev, judging by his comments, than the Orange One. It would be a stupendous risk for the Ukes to attempt an assassination. More likely a set-up job by Putin and even that it is so unlikely that its hardly worth taking into account. Nah, it was just a nutter and a cock-up by the security folk.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    pm215 said:

    Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

    It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

    It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.
    That is an appalling post.

    Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

    To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.
    I think it's pretty dubious of the EU to be putting loyalty clauses into their pension schemes in the first place, really. My employer doesn't get to yank back their contributions to my pension if I leave and go work for a competitor.
    I’m curious as to the history of the Loyalty oath.

    Were people taking jobs with trade/political rivals? Thinking of how in America, ex-pols often work as consultants to other countries. Schröder comes to mind as well.

    Had withdrawing a pension ever even been threatened?

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,433
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @sturdyAlex

    And so it begins.

    This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

    There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

    https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

    Yes, the big fights next year are going to be if Trump can get his cost-cutting agenda past a Congress wholly owned and sponsored by the big donors and lobbyists.

    The past couple of days have been an early example of what the next few months is going to bring. It’s going to be fascinating to watch (from a distance of many time zones!).
    Who are Trump and Musk owned by? Other big donors, lobbyists, and foreign entities.
    Trump maybe, Musk isn't. He's worth $447 Bn. Even if you take the value of say X down to zero he's still the richest man on the planet by a distance. ITAR regulations mean SpaceX is pretty much entirely American in fact and law.
    Yeah, the idea Musk is “owned by lobbyists and foreign entities” is quite sensationally dumb even by the standards of PB’s resident mental tardigrade, @JosiasJessop

    The reason so many - esp on the left - fear and loathe Musk is because he is extremely wealthy and powerful in his own right. Autonomous
    Agree. He's completely beyond the law and democracy but is shaping the future of the US. That's why "they" are probably going to have to kill him,.
    Possibly. It’s incredible how quickly we’ve memory holed the two sassytempts on Trump. One of which made him bleed and was 2cm from killing him
    The fucking useless Ukrainians used Fiverr.
    I’m glad you agree with my theory it was the Ukrainians. One day it will be revealed
    It wasn’t the Ukranians. The Ukranian assassination attempts are successful, and they use bombs rather than guns.
    But they have to be a tad more discreet taking out a US president in the USA
    They wouldn’t use a 20-year-old idiot who couldn’t even make his own school’s shooting team, trying to take the shot from 100 yards away on the roof of the bulding the police were using as their base for the day; they’d have used a serious ex-military sniper from half a mile, out of sight of the USSS and likely to get away before they could find him.
    No they wouldn’t. Think about it. If they used a pro and he got caught with links to Kyiv imagine the firestorm. All US aid would have ended instantly. And worse

    They had to find a dumb clean skin incel who was so stupid he thought he’d survive the sassytempt, coz that hot blonde Eastern European girl in the bar persuaded him so

    Jeez. It’s almost like you guys have never plotted thrillers
    The Ukranian government would have to be insane and/or incompetent not to kill DJT if they had the chance. I mean, why wouldn't they? If they thought they could.
    But of course. Who, overwhelmingly, has the money means men motivation and militaristic mindset to take out Trump? The Ukrainians

    FFS the second sassytempt was some nutter who actually fought for Ukraine, even as they now urgently disown him
    He didn’t. He tried to get involved, but was turned down as a useless nutter.
    Leon doesn't let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory. He thinks using 'facts' is something low-IQ people do... ;)
    Why do you do these cringe inducing emojis at the end of your comments? It doesn’t add anything and just makes you look like a prat
    Why do you make these cringe-inducing posts? They just make you look like a prat.

    I use emojis because it shows when I am not being fully serious, or making a slightly joking point. I have smileys on t'Internet since about 1989, so am in no mood to stop now.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,609
    edited December 20
    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    And even in their safe seat off Greenwich the Lib Dems surged

    Anybody but Labour by the looks of things

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869886076476596417?t=Fd8qEwvsNe1zbFfqGqwzBQ&s=19
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    edited December 20
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode
    A week is a long time in politics.

    We could have been at war with Trump by 2029. Starmer's military victory will eclipse the Falklands Factor.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Sandpit said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Leon said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Sandpit said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @sturdyAlex

    And so it begins.

    This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

    There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

    https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

    Yes, the big fights next year are going to be if Trump can get his cost-cutting agenda past a Congress wholly owned and sponsored by the big donors and lobbyists.

    The past couple of days have been an early example of what the next few months is going to bring. It’s going to be fascinating to watch (from a distance of many time zones!).
    Who are Trump and Musk owned by? Other big donors, lobbyists, and foreign entities.
    Trump maybe, Musk isn't. He's worth $447 Bn. Even if you take the value of say X down to zero he's still the richest man on the planet by a distance. ITAR regulations mean SpaceX is pretty much entirely American in fact and law.
    Yeah, the idea Musk is “owned by lobbyists and foreign entities” is quite sensationally dumb even by the standards of PB’s resident mental tardigrade, @JosiasJessop

    The reason so many - esp on the left - fear and loathe Musk is because he is extremely wealthy and powerful in his own right. Autonomous
    Agree. He's completely beyond the law and democracy but is shaping the future of the US. That's why "they" are probably going to have to kill him,.
    Possibly. It’s incredible how quickly we’ve memory holed the two sassytempts on Trump. One of which made him bleed and was 2cm from killing him
    The fucking useless Ukrainians used Fiverr.
    I’m glad you agree with my theory it was the Ukrainians. One day it will be revealed
    It wasn’t the Ukranians. The Ukranian assassination attempts are successful, and they use bombs rather than guns.
    But they have to be a tad more discreet taking out a US president in the USA
    They wouldn’t use a 20-year-old idiot who couldn’t even make his own school’s shooting team, trying to take the shot from 100 yards away on the roof of the bulding the police were using as their base for the day; they’d have used a serious ex-military sniper from half a mile, out of sight of the USSS and likely to get away before they could find him.
    No they wouldn’t. Think about it. If they used a pro and he got caught with links to Kyiv imagine the firestorm. All US aid would have ended instantly. And worse

    They had to find a dumb clean skin incel who was so stupid he thought he’d survive the sassytempt, coz that hot blonde Eastern European girl in the bar persuaded him so

    Jeez. It’s almost like you guys have never plotted thrillers
    The Ukranian government would have to be insane and/or incompetent not to kill DJT if they had the chance. I mean, why wouldn't they? If they thought they could.
    But of course. Who, overwhelmingly, has the money means men motivation and militaristic mindset to take out Trump? The Ukrainians

    FFS the second sassytempt was some nutter who actually fought for Ukraine, even as they now urgently disown him
    He didn’t. He tried to get involved, but was turned down as a useless nutter.
    Leon doesn't let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory. He thinks using 'facts' is something low-IQ people do... ;)
    In fact both the attempted assassins of Trump match a pattern - bouncing around, trying to find acceptance, even trying diametrically opposite ideologies to get it.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    edited December 20
    My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.


  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

    That also makes you a fucking wanker.
    Indeed so. But a fucking wanker who is a good deal smarter than you
    Can we have a citation or two in order to demonstrate your genius? You can't just claim world beating intellect when we have struggled on PB for years to find any prior evidence.
    I am literally paid to go on free holidays to luxury hotels in beautiful sunny places
    Yes, you are a paid sex tourist.
    Nice work if you can get it?
    Not really. It'd probably be a very soulless and empty lifestyle, at least from my perspective. Which might be why he tries to make his life out to be so brilliant; because it is actually so empty...
    If it’s any help my life does feel a little minimalist sometimes, if not quite empty. I have no partner, no pets. Lots of good friends but that’s different. Kids now at uni

    But I also like that and always have done. The absolute freedom, and I accept the occasional empty moment is the price I must pay. I may change as time passes and want more by way of connections - if anyone will have me

    However, the travel? No, there you’re totally wrong. Getting paid to travel (and that travel being free) is as brilliant as it sounds. Even now when I start an assignment I slightly pinch myself - “they’re paying me? To do THIS?”

    True story
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972
    TOPPING said:

    My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.


    Kamala Harris Mugs, otherwise known as Democrat voters.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,811
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode
    That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

    I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    TOPPING said:

    My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.


    Hahaha

    Also note the “Kamala 28?” Merch

    I’ve seen this idea floated elsewhere. That she should run again in 2028

    I mean, if the Democrats really want to die out forever…. That’s the way to go
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,945
    "Swedish rapper Gaboro was viciously shot to death in a car park last night in the city of Norrköping, according to Swedish outlet Expressen, just six months after award-winning masked rapper C.Gambino was shot dead in Sweden."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14213491/Moment-Swedish-gangster-rapper-shot-multiple-times-parking-lot-begs-life-filmed-gunman.html
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    TOPPING said:

    My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.


    Buy a shit load, they can only go up in value as the developing Trump fiasco reminds voters of the error by they have just made.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    TOPPING said:

    My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.


    Buy a shit load, they can only go up in value as the developing Trump fiasco reminds voters of the error by they have just made.
    There were a lot of "you missed, bitch" t-shirts and stuff around also.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode
    That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

    I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.
    I think there’s a 30% chance that Labour come THIRD at the next GE
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,286

    Scott_xP said:

    @sturdyAlex

    And so it begins.

    This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

    There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

    https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

    The Trump-Musk falling out is going to be absolutely spectacular. Alien vs Predator level stuff. I have no doubt who will come out on top.
    Ok, who?
    Oh, Trump, easily.
    Though for those in the USA who would like a genuine roll-back of democracy eg Project 2025, I can see them wanting to back Musk not Trump.

    Trump, imo, is simply a narcissist who loves the attention. From what I have seen of Musk he is much more of an ideologue - an extreme example of the widespread view amongst the tech elite that politics is much simpler than it is.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,335
    kle4 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @sturdyAlex

    And so it begins.

    This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

    There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

    https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

    The Trump-Musk falling out is going to be absolutely spectacular. Alien vs Predator level stuff. I have no doubt who will come out on top.
    Musk does seem to be pushing it a bit too quickly, especially as Trump has not even gotten his feet back under the Resolute desk yet. What's his hurry?
    Musk is always in a hurry.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    ...
    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.


    Buy a shit load, they can only go up in value as the developing Trump fiasco reminds voters of the error by they have just made.
    There were a lot of "you missed, bitch" t-shirts and stuff around also.
    Pride comes before a fall.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,069
    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    Your usual elegant twist of a rebuttal to my central thesis.

    However I went to College Green a couple of times during the Brexit wars and experienced close up the two sets of protestors, and ... well there wasn't much enlightenment on show with the Leave mob.

    Typical Remainer banter was about the weather and Robert Peston's hat. From the Leavers, "Oi Burley you slaaaag".

    You knew who shouldn't be winning. You'd have felt the same if you were there.
    Well, I also remember the young poshos (and Bob Geldof? seems incredible now - surely I'm misremembering) heckling the leave voting fishermen on the Thames for being so dreadfully common. Boorishness and tribalism wasn't limited to one side.
    But the enlightened thing to do, of course - which I'm sure you and I both did - is to weigh the issues, risk, rewards and likelinesses of these and vote on this basis - regardless of how the vote made us feel, and regardless of how the tribalism of the less enlightened supporters of each side made us feel.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    ...

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.


    Buy a shit load, they can only go up in value as the developing Trump fiasco reminds voters of the error by they have just made.
    There were a lot of "you missed, bitch" t-shirts and stuff around also.
    Pride comes before a fall.
    I mean we'll see won't we but this was surely the opposite. He was shot, fell down, then got up and won the presidential election.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972
    Andy_JS said:

    "Swedish rapper Gaboro was viciously shot to death in a car park last night in the city of Norrköping, according to Swedish outlet Expressen, just six months after award-winning masked rapper C.Gambino was shot dead in Sweden."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14213491/Moment-Swedish-gangster-rapper-shot-multiple-times-parking-lot-begs-life-filmed-gunman.html

    Those pictures leave little to the imagination !!!!
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    TOPPING said:

    ...

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.


    Buy a shit load, they can only go up in value as the developing Trump fiasco reminds voters of the error by they have just made.
    There were a lot of "you missed, bitch" t-shirts and stuff around also.
    Pride comes before a fall.
    I mean we'll see won't we but this was surely the opposite. He was shot, fell down, then got up and won the presidential election.
    I was thinking of those white working class voters whose current hubris is likely to change to regret when they lose their Medicare and social security payments.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972
    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    Your usual elegant twist of a rebuttal to my central thesis.

    However I went to College Green a couple of times during the Brexit wars and experienced close up the two sets of protestors, and ... well there wasn't much enlightenment on show with the Leave mob.

    Typical Remainer banter was about the weather and Robert Peston's hat. From the Leavers, "Oi Burley you slaaaag".

    You knew who shouldn't be winning. You'd have felt the same if you were there.
    Well, I also remember the young poshos (and Bob Geldof? seems incredible now - surely I'm misremembering) heckling the leave voting fishermen on the Thames for being so dreadfully common. Boorishness and tribalism wasn't limited to one side.
    But the enlightened thing to do, of course - which I'm sure you and I both did - is to weigh the issues, risk, rewards and likelinesses of these and vote on this basis - regardless of how the vote made us feel, and regardless of how the tribalism of the less enlightened supporters of each side made us feel.
    I remember that. Some posh bird was showing them a designer shoe and sticking their tongue out at them.

    What a bellend and Geldof is a dick of the first order.

    Rachel Johnson was on the boat too.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode
    That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

    I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.
    I think there’s a 30% chance that Labour come THIRD at the next GE
    As it stands it's probably a great deal higher than 30%. I take it you are accounting for swingback.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Andy_JS said:

    "Swedish rapper Gaboro was viciously shot to death in a car park last night in the city of Norrköping, according to Swedish outlet Expressen, just six months after award-winning masked rapper C.Gambino was shot dead in Sweden."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14213491/Moment-Swedish-gangster-rapper-shot-multiple-times-parking-lot-begs-life-filmed-gunman.html

    "viciously shot to death"
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,945
    For distribution of a podcast to various platforms it's pretty much just pressing a button.

    Except Apple.

    Which is the only one that requires a tutorial video and signing up for an account. *sighs*

    Anyway, that's almost all the technical rubbish done with.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode
    That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

    I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.
    Redcar will show you what will happen - they will give a party 1 election to deliver and if you don’t they will move on to the next option.

    But if the Tories have a coalition with reform than that is going to have long term Tory impact
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    ...

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode
    That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

    I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.
    Does Farage cleanse the Tories?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,069
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    Well this is exactly the point. I must be missing something. I must be. There must be some benefit to Britain. I don't want to fall into the trap of the Remainers who reckon to be able to see literally no benefits whatsoever for Brexit.
    Because I can't see any benefits whatsoever to Chagos, either to the British exchequer(who have to shell out to give Chagos away), or to western security (because valuable Indian Ocean territory goes to the Chinese) or to the environment (because thousands of square miles of protected ocean, including valuable coral reefs, quickly get given to the Chinese trawlers), or to Chagos islanders (who seem unimpressed).
    But this must mean I am missing something. Because surely people don't take decisions with no upside whatsoever? Surely?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    edited December 20
    TOPPING said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Swedish rapper Gaboro was viciously shot to death in a car park last night in the city of Norrköping, according to Swedish outlet Expressen, just six months after award-winning masked rapper C.Gambino was shot dead in Sweden."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14213491/Moment-Swedish-gangster-rapper-shot-multiple-times-parking-lot-begs-life-filmed-gunman.html

    "viciously shot to death"
    Boring choice of adverb. Could have gone for

    “Operatically”

    “Heteronormatively”

    “Open-sandwich-makingly”

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,405
    Taz said:



    Andy_JS said:

    "Swedish rapper Gaboro was viciously shot to death in a car park last night in the city of Norrköping, according to Swedish outlet Expressen, just six months after award-winning masked rapper C.Gambino was shot dead in Sweden."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14213491/Moment-Swedish-gangster-rapper-shot-multiple-times-parking-lot-begs-life-filmed-gunman.html

    Those pictures leave little to the imagination !!!!
    A disturbing video allegedly showing the murder of the 24-year-old rapper, whose real name is Ninos Khouri, is circulating on social media.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    Well this is exactly the point. I must be missing something. I must be. There must be some benefit to Britain. I don't want to fall into the trap of the Remainers who reckon to be able to see literally no benefits whatsoever for Brexit.
    Because I can't see any benefits whatsoever to Chagos, either to the British exchequer(who have to shell out to give Chagos away), or to western security (because valuable Indian Ocean territory goes to the Chinese) or to the environment (because thousands of square miles of protected ocean, including valuable coral reefs, quickly get given to the Chinese trawlers), or to Chagos islanders (who seem unimpressed).
    But this must mean I am missing something. Because surely people don't take decisions with no upside whatsoever? Surely?
    The upside is that absurd human rights lawyers, and their ilk - eg Keir Starmer and Philippe Sands - get to feel good about “upholding international law”

    That’s it
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode
    That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

    I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.
    I think I would diagnose it differently. The Red Wall went to Boris on the promise of better times. It went back to Labour, not because of a come-to-Jesus moment, but because the better times were not delivered.

    Party loyalty is lessening. In part because people see the parties as beholden to special interest groups that aren’t them.

    So it’s on to the next vendor?

    One of the few amusing things about the Culture Wars, is that one side demands sensitivity in language and respect for one set of groups. Then is surprised when “the other lot” respond negatively to being labelled as nearly genetically evil. Which side you say? Both, actually.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Five years is a Long time. The right don’t seem to get that. Appear to be still in election mode and not thinking strategically.

    Nobody knows what the next election will bring. Can see almost any outcome.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Swedish rapper Gaboro was viciously shot to death in a car park last night in the city of Norrköping, according to Swedish outlet Expressen, just six months after award-winning masked rapper C.Gambino was shot dead in Sweden."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14213491/Moment-Swedish-gangster-rapper-shot-multiple-times-parking-lot-begs-life-filmed-gunman.html

    "viciously shot to death"
    Boring choice of adverb. Could have gone for

    “Operatically”

    “Heteronormatively”

    “Open-sandwich-makingly”

    Perhaps you can try again after you have completed the basic comedy writing course.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Sean_F said:

    I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

    It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

    The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

    https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19
    Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?
    Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode
    That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

    I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.
    I think there’s a 30% chance that Labour come THIRD at the next GE
    As it stands it's probably a great deal higher than 30%. I take it you are accounting for swingback.
    They will not come below the Lib Dems because the LD vote will also tank. The LDs will be in the most uncomfortable position of all the main parties and I don't think Davy's stunts will play as well in a contested election. They have to answer the Have you stopped beating your wife questions ?
    If you and Labour could form a coalition after the next government would you ?
    Would you insist on all the IHT changes being annulled and the victims families fully reimbursed ?
    If you wouldn't go into a coalition with another party to form a government why should anyone vote for you ?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    Jonathan said:

    Five years is a Long time. The right don’t seem to get that. Appear to be still in election mode and not thinking strategically.

    Nobody knows what the next election will bring. Can see almost any outcome.

    I think it (say 15%) not impossible that an entirely new party might win the next election.

    Whether that is just a new party or The New Party, is an issue, of course.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    Jonathan said:

    Five years is a Long time. The right don’t seem to get that. Appear to be still in election mode and not thinking strategically.

    Nobody knows what the next election will bring. Can see almost any outcome.

    Er, this is political betting. Our whole raison d’etre is making predictions, sometimes from absurdly long distances - geographical and temporal

    Perhaps you’d be happier on nopoliticalbettingherethanks.com
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,143
    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    Five years is a Long time. The right don’t seem to get that. Appear to be still in election mode and not thinking strategically.

    Nobody knows what the next election will bring. Can see almost any outcome.

    Er, this is political betting. Our whole raison d’etre is making predictions, sometimes from absurdly long distances - geographical and temporal

    Perhaps you’d be happier on nopoliticalbettingherethanks.com
    Predicting what happens in an election four or five years away requires a tad more than looking at current polling or news cycles.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    Well this is exactly the point. I must be missing something. I must be. There must be some benefit to Britain. I don't want to fall into the trap of the Remainers who reckon to be able to see literally no benefits whatsoever for Brexit.
    Because I can't see any benefits whatsoever to Chagos, either to the British exchequer(who have to shell out to give Chagos away), or to western security (because valuable Indian Ocean territory goes to the Chinese) or to the environment (because thousands of square miles of protected ocean, including valuable coral reefs, quickly get given to the Chinese trawlers), or to Chagos islanders (who seem unimpressed).
    But this must mean I am missing something. Because surely people don't take decisions with no upside whatsoever? Surely?
    The upside is that absurd human rights lawyers, and their ilk - eg Keir Starmer and Philippe Sands - get to feel good about “upholding international law”

    That’s it
    One thing that hasn’t got much mention is the lack of input of the Chagos Islanders into the matter.

    The UN decolonisation thing has never been about democratic outcomes. It was established during the Cold War period, when democracy was a Western, Colonialist thing. In 1989 everyone discovered a love for pluralistic social democracy. But the old patterns remained. Note the rejection of the vote by the Falkland Islanders by the UN admin. as settling that issue.

    The whole argument about handing the Chagos to Mauritius was based on a colonial administrative division.

    In the modern world, it would be fairly simple to track down the Chagos Islanders and descendants who are directly concerned and setup a virtual democratic system where they could speak and vote on what they want.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,682
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Has anyone else got this stupid lurgy? Several of my friends have. And now me

    It’s quite weird. In some ways it’s mild. No sore throat, no muscle aches. Not enough to keep you in bed (unless you want), but lots of sneezing and deep coughing and a definite yuk feeling and, worse, it really drags on

    We all report similar symptoms

    Had exactly that recently, lingered on for 2 weeks. Neg for Covid.
    Even at the height of covid most respiratory infections (where people tested) were not covid. Its as if we have forgotten that other bugs were always around and always more prominent in winter.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,645

    Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

    It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

    It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.
    That is an appalling post.

    Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

    To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.
    Bottom line: these sort of appointments shouldn’t be massively controversial as this, the fact Starmer and his team can’t comprehend their mistake is rank bad shooting your own feet off politics.
  • I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    Five years is a Long time. The right don’t seem to get that. Appear to be still in election mode and not thinking strategically.

    Nobody knows what the next election will bring. Can see almost any outcome.

    Er, this is political betting. Our whole raison d’etre is making predictions, sometimes from absurdly long distances - geographical and temporal

    Perhaps you’d be happier on nopoliticalbettingherethanks.com
    It’s not politicalwildspeculationandbs.com

    If you are betting on the outcome of GE29 you might consider what politics is like in the post Trump era. Things might be radically different.

    If there was an election today Labour might lose, but then again if there was an election today Labour wound acting very differently.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,760
    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

    That also makes you a fucking wanker.
    Hardly breaking news.
    Flaubert once said: Voyager rend modeste.

    How wrong he was.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    You obviously don't understand the red wall or Labour voters in general. They will be delighted that a very small fraction of the population will have to pay more in school fees than previously because when they head down to Lidl for their weekly shop it is precisely the fact that it costs more to send children to private school now than it did before the election that helps them budget for their tins of beans and mixed veg. They will rejoice and will flock to Lab like never before.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Indeed you have but you are making the point to people who would not even know these places on a map and just have disdain for these people. I also have said similar. But then both of us either have lived, or do live, in these areas. Nigelb has mentioned his wife works as a teacher in an area like this too.

    Life chances are poor, the economy does not work, the Brexit offer was improved lives and prospects which has failed.

    The current plight of the Gateshead Flyover is a perfect metaphor for these areas.

    I am even tempted to vote Reform at the local elections to send a message to Labour as I think they have a chance in my ward. I would vote my independent councillor first but we are a multi member ward.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    Well this is exactly the point. I must be missing something. I must be. There must be some benefit to Britain. I don't want to fall into the trap of the Remainers who reckon to be able to see literally no benefits whatsoever for Brexit.
    Because I can't see any benefits whatsoever to Chagos, either to the British exchequer(who have to shell out to give Chagos away), or to western security (because valuable Indian Ocean territory goes to the Chinese) or to the environment (because thousands of square miles of protected ocean, including valuable coral reefs, quickly get given to the Chinese trawlers), or to Chagos islanders (who seem unimpressed).
    But this must mean I am missing something. Because surely people don't take decisions with no upside whatsoever? Surely?
    The upside is that absurd human rights lawyers, and their ilk - eg Keir Starmer and Philippe Sands - get to feel good about “upholding international law”

    That’s it
    One thing that hasn’t got much mention is the lack of input of the Chagos Islanders into the matter.

    The UN decolonisation thing has never been about democratic outcomes. It was established during the Cold War period, when democracy was a Western, Colonialist thing. In 1989 everyone discovered a love for pluralistic social democracy. But the old patterns remained. Note the rejection of the vote by the Falkland Islanders by the UN admin. as settling that issue.

    The whole argument about handing the Chagos to Mauritius was based on a colonial administrative division.

    In the modern world, it would be fairly simple to track down the Chagos Islanders and descendants who are directly concerned and setup a virtual democratic system where they could speak and vote on what they want.
    Yes, exactly. The DEMOCRATIC thing is to find the Chagos Islanders, who are entitled to a vote, and then offer them a choice. Independence, go with Mauritius, or become full British citizens with all the rights that bestows, and all future decisions about the archipelago made jointly between Britain and a new "Chagos Council". Unfortunately, whatever they choose, they will not be allowed back on the atoll of Diego Garcia itself, as the west needs that base (note that this is also the case with the present deal with Mauritius, as it will be with any deal)

    I am pretty sure they would vote for the third choice, fiull UK citizenship, Diego Garcia remains British but they have significantly more rights - but, hey, if they choose to go with Mauritius, fair enough

    But give them the choice! How hard is that?
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972
    TOPPING said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    You obviously don't understand the red wall or Labour voters in general. They will be delighted that a very small fraction of the population will have to pay more in school fees than previously because when they head down to Lidl for their weekly shop it is precisely the fact that it costs more to send children to private school now than it did before the election that helps them budget for their tins of beans and mixed veg. They will rejoice and will flock to Lab like never before.
    You make a good point there but it is the central Aisle at Aldi we flock to. Got to get a Fire Extinguisher or a fishing rod with the weekly shop.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 52,268

    Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

    It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

    It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.
    That is an appalling post.

    Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

    To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.
    Bottom line: these sort of appointments shouldn’t be massively controversial as this, the fact Starmer and his team can’t comprehend their mistake is rank bad shooting your own feet off politics.
    Would someone with an instinctive feel for politics have given this answer?

    https://x.com/paulembery/status/1870070383283482802

    Still amazed that this video from last year, in which Starmer says he would choose Davos over Westminster, didn't get more traction. He was basically admitting that he prefers technocracy over democracy. It really was an astonishing statement.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,682
    I see the long arm of the law has finally come for those involved in the fights with police at Manchester Airport...

    https://bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c627e37v21eo
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,704
    Five years ago the Tories were dominant, looking at ten years, Farage was done and across the pond the Democrats were heading back to power.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972

    Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

    It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

    It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.
    That is an appalling post.

    Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

    To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.
    Bottom line: these sort of appointments shouldn’t be massively controversial as this, the fact Starmer and his team can’t comprehend their mistake is rank bad shooting your own feet off politics.
    Would someone with an instinctive feel for politics have given this answer?

    https://x.com/paulembery/status/1870070383283482802

    Still amazed that this video from last year, in which Starmer says he would choose Davos over Westminster, didn't get more traction. He was basically admitting that he prefers technocracy over democracy. It really was an astonishing statement.
    At that stage people were so sick of the Tories I don't think it mattered. It may come back to haunt Sir Kier.
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,811
    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    Well this is exactly the point. I must be missing something. I must be. There must be some benefit to Britain. I don't want to fall into the trap of the Remainers who reckon to be able to see literally no benefits whatsoever for Brexit.
    Because I can't see any benefits whatsoever to Chagos, either to the British exchequer(who have to shell out to give Chagos away), or to western security (because valuable Indian Ocean territory goes to the Chinese) or to the environment (because thousands of square miles of protected ocean, including valuable coral reefs, quickly get given to the Chinese trawlers), or to Chagos islanders (who seem unimpressed).
    But this must mean I am missing something. Because surely people don't take decisions with no upside whatsoever? Surely?
    I believe a prime actor in all this was Jonathan Powell - who's just been appointed Starmer's National Security Advisor.

    I wonder what will go next? Rockall to the Irish Republic? Shetland to Norway?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012

    I see the long arm of the law has finally come for those involved in the fights with police at Manchester Airport...

    https://bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c627e37v21eo

    A kick to the head of a person lying prone on the ground would normally be charged as an attempted murder on the basis that it is wickedly reckless and carries a foreseeable risk of a fatality.

    Just saying.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,682
    DavidL said:

    I see the long arm of the law has finally come for those involved in the fights with police at Manchester Airport...

    https://bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c627e37v21eo

    A kick to the head of a person lying prone on the ground would normally be charged as an attempted murder on the basis that it is wickedly reckless and carries a foreseeable risk of a fatality.

    Just saying.
    Quite and I hope justice is done to all.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,645
    edited December 20
    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    Five years is a Long time. The right don’t seem to get that. Appear to be still in election mode and not thinking strategically.

    Nobody knows what the next election will bring. Can see almost any outcome.

    Er, this is political betting. Our whole raison d’etre is making predictions, sometimes from absurdly long distances - geographical and temporal

    Perhaps you’d be happier on nopoliticalbettingherethanks.com
    It’s not politicalwildspeculationandbs.com

    If you are betting on the outcome of GE29 you might consider what politics is like in the post Trump era. Things might be radically different.

    If there was an election today Labour might lose, but then again if there was an election today Labour wound acting very differently.
    “but then again if there was an election today Labour wound acting very differently…”

    I agree.

    The response to my header was no one on PB believed the post 2024 budget was ever going to be a giveaway budget, the PB consensus was it was always going to be a tax raising budget whoever won the election. But a lot of people who criticised the budget have been ignorant of the threat of inflation still around. It’s economically impossible to turn all the bath taps on full steam ahead for growth, without inherent vice like income eroding inflation.

    The problem for Labour are the dire long term forcasts for the world economy. No growth to speak of till the early thirties. The inflationary forcasts are more coy, but it looks like the threat of inflationary disaster will hang around for years.

    My macro economic take is the next 2 or 3 budgets must also be tax taking, anti growth anti inflationary budgets, or the income erosion that has destroyed so many governments worldwide in recent years, will return to UK. But I don’t think the economic team around the top of Starmer’s government are smart enough to keep resisting going for growth, so they are probably voted out May 2029 after presiding over further income erosion. Income erosion will shift more votes away than lack of growth and technical recessions will.

    The Trump team are definitely not smart enough to keep a hold on inflation, they will certainly get electorally smashed in 2026 and 2028.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082

    Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

    It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

    It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.
    That is an appalling post.

    Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

    To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.
    Bottom line: these sort of appointments shouldn’t be massively controversial as this, the fact Starmer and his team can’t comprehend their mistake is rank bad shooting your own feet off politics.
    Would someone with an instinctive feel for politics have given this answer?

    https://x.com/paulembery/status/1870070383283482802

    Still amazed that this video from last year, in which Starmer says he would choose Davos over Westminster, didn't get more traction. He was basically admitting that he prefers technocracy over democracy. It really was an astonishing statement.
    Yes, they would. Those sentiments were exactly those that I saw at that City dinner, years ago.

    The thinking is that allegiance to just your country is petty nationalism. That more is owed to the wider world, and that the locals need to understand their place in the hierarchy of needs.

    To a number, this is Decent Politics.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,012

    DavidL said:

    I see the long arm of the law has finally come for those involved in the fights with police at Manchester Airport...

    https://bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c627e37v21eo

    A kick to the head of a person lying prone on the ground would normally be charged as an attempted murder on the basis that it is wickedly reckless and carries a foreseeable risk of a fatality.

    Just saying.
    Quite and I hope justice is done to all.
    Not looking that way.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,916

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,172
    Dura_Ace said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

    That also makes you a fucking wanker.
    Hardly breaking news.
    Flaubert once said: Voyager rend modeste.

    How wrong he was.
    Well, we don't actually know what Leon was like before travel broadened his mind.
  • On Latin..

    One thing that everyone should have to learn (preferably before they are legally allowed to utter it) is what etc means

    Ecksetra makes me wince. And why is it always repeated? Ecksetra, ecksetra.. My second wince is almost a gurn

    Et cetera means and the rest

    And the rest and the rest

    Who would say that?

    The difference between exempli gratia and id est should be next on the list
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972
    edited December 20

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
  • TOPPING said:

    Andy_JS said:

    "Swedish rapper Gaboro was viciously shot to death in a car park last night in the city of Norrköping, according to Swedish outlet Expressen, just six months after award-winning masked rapper C.Gambino was shot dead in Sweden."

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14213491/Moment-Swedish-gangster-rapper-shot-multiple-times-parking-lot-begs-life-filmed-gunman.html

    "viciously shot to death"
    AI translation of a Swedish report?
  • Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Indeed you have but you are making the point to people who would not even know these places on a map and just have disdain for these people. I also have said similar. But then both of us either have lived, or do live, in these areas. Nigelb has mentioned his wife works as a teacher in an area like this too.

    Life chances are poor, the economy does not work, the Brexit offer was improved lives and prospects which has failed.

    The current plight of the Gateshead Flyover is a perfect metaphor for these areas.

    I am even tempted to vote Reform at the local elections to send a message to Labour as I think they have a chance in my ward. I would vote my independent councillor first but we are a multi member ward.
    The absurd thing about local politics is that everyone who isn't running the council can point in pretty precise detail at where our money is being pissed up against the wall, but once elected to power become blind to it.

    Reform generally offer crayon politics - child's drawings in crayon showing a problem and an overly-simplistic solution. But behind the red crayon is enough truth to cut through once hope is lost.

    And don't get me started on the Gateshead flyover. A pointless relic of a cancelled motorway. Bulldoze it already.
  • Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
    Labour *don't know how* to level up.
    The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

    Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972

    Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Indeed you have but you are making the point to people who would not even know these places on a map and just have disdain for these people. I also have said similar. But then both of us either have lived, or do live, in these areas. Nigelb has mentioned his wife works as a teacher in an area like this too.

    Life chances are poor, the economy does not work, the Brexit offer was improved lives and prospects which has failed.

    The current plight of the Gateshead Flyover is a perfect metaphor for these areas.

    I am even tempted to vote Reform at the local elections to send a message to Labour as I think they have a chance in my ward. I would vote my independent councillor first but we are a multi member ward.
    The absurd thing about local politics is that everyone who isn't running the council can point in pretty precise detail at where our money is being pissed up against the wall, but once elected to power become blind to it.

    Reform generally offer crayon politics - child's drawings in crayon showing a problem and an overly-simplistic solution. But behind the red crayon is enough truth to cut through once hope is lost.

    And don't get me started on the Gateshead flyover. A pointless relic of a cancelled motorway. Bulldoze it already.
    Your first paragraph. Durham Council is the perfect epitome of that. Great at pointing out the many flaws with the Labour administration.

    Once the opposition took power from Labour classic role reversal. The coalition just as bad and my local independent left the group disillusioned.

    When I regularly cycled over it the flyover was in an awful state and the drains had not been cleared for years. A little rain and it was like a stream gushing down it.

    Reform don't need to offer anything else. Of course, like with the opposition in Durham, once in power (if they ever won a council) they will be tested. They will come up short I have no doubt about it. But they do seem more serious than UKIP and Brexit Party.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,420
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    I try not to allow nascent nationalistic fervour colour my view here, but I've been a bit stumped what the perceived advantages fo that whole deal were supposed to be, particularly given how things have developed.

    At a pragmatic, practical level (which is how every other country seems to be playing it) did we get gain anything useful?

    Not that I disagree with the basic premise about weighing up options and taking heat out of politics generally.
    The advantage of the deal is that we stop being in breach of international law.
    But how much does that actually get us? That's a moral argument, and no one else in this matter seems to care about the moral position or the Chagossians, certainly not Mauritius or the UK. It doesn't appear to have gained us any goodwill with any party, so sure, no longer a breach, but given for all sides this seems to just be a transactional matter, I'm not particularly fussed on the moral position.
    I think it’s a good thing to uphold international law. The international rules-based order since World War II has done a relatively good job at maintaining peace and security compared to the first half of the 20th century or to the 19th century. I don’t think we win under the Strong Man approach to global politics of Putin, Trump and Netanyahu.

    It is also the case that upholding international law conspicuously helps in international relations. It is difficult to criticise other countries, e.g. Russia, Israel, for breaking international law if we’re also breaking it. Other countries do cite such matters.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,916

    Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
    Labour *don't know how* to level up.
    The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

    Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.
    This is why Reform’s message is so hard to counter. When you distrust Labour/Tories so much, as a regular voter on the street who feels ignored, why wouldn’t you give them a go?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    edited December 20

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    I try not to allow nascent nationalistic fervour colour my view here, but I've been a bit stumped what the perceived advantages fo that whole deal were supposed to be, particularly given how things have developed.

    At a pragmatic, practical level (which is how every other country seems to be playing it) did we get gain anything useful?

    Not that I disagree with the basic premise about weighing up options and taking heat out of politics generally.
    The advantage of the deal is that we stop being in breach of international law.
    But how much does that actually get us? That's a moral argument, and no one else in this matter seems to care about the moral position or the Chagossians, certainly not Mauritius or the UK. It doesn't appear to have gained us any goodwill with any party, so sure, no longer a breach, but given for all sides this seems to just be a transactional matter, I'm not particularly fussed on the moral position.
    I think it’s a good thing to uphold international law. The international rules-based order since World War II has done a relatively good job at maintaining peace and security compared to the first half of the 20th century or to the 19th century. I don’t think we win under the Strong Man approach to global politics of Putin, Trump and Netanyahu.

    It is also the case that upholding international law conspicuously helps in international relations. It is difficult to criticise other countries, e.g. Russia, Israel, for breaking international law if we’re also breaking it. Other countries do cite such matters.
    What a load of bollocks, from beginning to end

    For a start, the 19th century, certainly after 1815, was a benign period for humanity, compared to what came before and after


    "When viewed in terms of large-scale, Europe-wide or globally transformative wars between major powers, the 19th century (particularly from the Congress of Vienna in 1815 to the outbreak of World War I in 1914) was generally more stable than the 18th century’s frequent dynastic conflicts and far less globally devastating than the industrialized and ideological cataclysms of the 20th century."

    Pax Brittanica was a thing

    The rest of your comment is on a similarly sophomoric level
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,645

    On Latin..

    One thing that everyone should have to learn (preferably before they are legally allowed to utter it) is what etc means

    Ecksetra makes me wince. And why is it always repeated? Ecksetra, ecksetra.. My second wince is almost a gurn

    Et cetera means and the rest

    And the rest and the rest

    Who would say that?

    The difference between exempli gratia and id est should be next on the list

    I don’t recall learning Latin at my school, I might have bern off sick when they done it.

    How do you say “dick pic of a Latin on friends smart phone behind car park” in Latin?
  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 2,811
    Nice provocative header this.

    Of course, it's balls. Thousands of unionist-inclined voters switching to "Yes" on the promise of a Scottish Republic? Hmm.

    The only way IndyRef2 can be won is if the Yes team can take heat out of the debate and make a move to independence seem natural, friction-free, and inevitable.

    Needlessly introducing another constitutional change, which will only enrage and motivate a section of the unionist community, is hardly going to smooth the way.

    It's little wonder that Salmond, Sturgeon, Swinney, et al, have carefully skirted the issue for years whatever the SNP rank and file may think.

  • On Latin..

    One thing that everyone should have to learn (preferably before they are legally allowed to utter it) is what etc means

    Ecksetra makes me wince. And why is it always repeated? Ecksetra, ecksetra.. My second wince is almost a gurn

    Et cetera means and the rest

    And the rest and the rest

    Who would say that?

    The difference between exempli gratia and id est should be next on the list

    No, everybody should learn Catullus 16.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    I try not to allow nascent nationalistic fervour colour my view here, but I've been a bit stumped what the perceived advantages fo that whole deal were supposed to be, particularly given how things have developed.

    At a pragmatic, practical level (which is how every other country seems to be playing it) did we get gain anything useful?

    Not that I disagree with the basic premise about weighing up options and taking heat out of politics generally.
    The advantage of the deal is that we stop being in breach of international law.
    But how much does that actually get us? That's a moral argument, and no one else in this matter seems to care about the moral position or the Chagossians, certainly not Mauritius or the UK. It doesn't appear to have gained us any goodwill with any party, so sure, no longer a breach, but given for all sides this seems to just be a transactional matter, I'm not particularly fussed on the moral position.
    I think it’s a good thing to uphold international law. The international rules-based order since World War II has done a relatively good job at maintaining peace and security compared to the first half of the 20th century or to the 19th century. I don’t think we win under the Strong Man approach to global politics of Putin, Trump and Netanyahu.

    It is also the case that upholding international law conspicuously helps in international relations. It is difficult to criticise other countries, e.g. Russia, Israel, for breaking international law if we’re also breaking it. Other countries do cite such matters.
    There is no such thing as international law. It is just the set of rules most recently agreed upon by whoever were Top Nations at the time. As there is currently only one Top Nation it is that nation which makes the rules. Or breaks them.

    There is, however, pragmatism, which every nation engages in.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
    Labour *don't know how* to level up.
    The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

    Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.
    Denmark works, up to a point

    Social democracy in many areas, but an antipathy to Wokeness and a fierce clampdown on migration and asylum

    It has

    1. Got the Danish Social Democrats re-elected, almost uniquely amongst left wing parties in Europe

    and

    2. The Danish economy is trotting along nicely, mainly thanks to Ozempic but still, it's growing

    If Farage is smart (which he is) he should offer exactly what they did
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807
    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:



    Substantive policy decisions will, in any event, be made by the government, not by the ambassador.
    Mandleson's job is to smooth the relationship with the US, not sabotage it; if he fails in that, he won't last long in post.

    Nicko Henderson was the ambassador when my father worked at the DC embassy. According to him, Henderson ran his own completely autonomous foreign policy and often wouldn't even pick up the phone when King Charles Street was calling. He was a distressed purchase by Thatcher who had to appoint him in a tearing hurry when Heath told her to shove the job up her narrow arse.

    NH was also a workaholic which was ill-matched to my father's overwhelming preference to spend his working day doing crosswords and perusing catalogues of model train bits.
    Sad for all concerned Heath not wanting to go to the US. There was very little point in the loathsome liver-spotted sack of bile remaining in the Commons.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,645

    Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
    Labour *don't know how* to level up.
    The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

    Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.
    This is why Reform’s message is so hard to counter. When you distrust Labour/Tories so much, as a regular voter on the street who feels ignored, why wouldn’t you give them a go?
    Because the vast majority of voters aren’t as ignorant and stupid as you are making out. They know the difference between a slogan and an actual policy.

    Reform vote will eventually be eaten up by the Conservatives, who are struggling to at moment as they shredded the parties long term vote winner for economic competence - but the process won’t be quick, and we’ll have to put up with several Labour governments before we get there.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,645

    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:



    Substantive policy decisions will, in any event, be made by the government, not by the ambassador.
    Mandleson's job is to smooth the relationship with the US, not sabotage it; if he fails in that, he won't last long in post.

    Nicko Henderson was the ambassador when my father worked at the DC embassy. According to him, Henderson ran his own completely autonomous foreign policy and often wouldn't even pick up the phone when King Charles Street was calling. He was a distressed purchase by Thatcher who had to appoint him in a tearing hurry when Heath told her to shove the job up her narrow arse.

    NH was also a workaholic which was ill-matched to my father's overwhelming preference to spend his working day doing crosswords and perusing catalogues of model train bits.
    Sad for all concerned Heath not wanting to go to the US. There was very little point in the loathsome liver-spotted sack of bile remaining in the Commons.
    You didn’t like him? What did he do wrong?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496
    TOPPING said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    I try not to allow nascent nationalistic fervour colour my view here, but I've been a bit stumped what the perceived advantages fo that whole deal were supposed to be, particularly given how things have developed.

    At a pragmatic, practical level (which is how every other country seems to be playing it) did we get gain anything useful?

    Not that I disagree with the basic premise about weighing up options and taking heat out of politics generally.
    The advantage of the deal is that we stop being in breach of international law.
    But how much does that actually get us? That's a moral argument, and no one else in this matter seems to care about the moral position or the Chagossians, certainly not Mauritius or the UK. It doesn't appear to have gained us any goodwill with any party, so sure, no longer a breach, but given for all sides this seems to just be a transactional matter, I'm not particularly fussed on the moral position.
    I think it’s a good thing to uphold international law. The international rules-based order since World War II has done a relatively good job at maintaining peace and security compared to the first half of the 20th century or to the 19th century. I don’t think we win under the Strong Man approach to global politics of Putin, Trump and Netanyahu.

    It is also the case that upholding international law conspicuously helps in international relations. It is difficult to criticise other countries, e.g. Russia, Israel, for breaking international law if we’re also breaking it. Other countries do cite such matters.
    There is no such thing as international law. It is just the set of rules most recently agreed upon by whoever were Top Nations at the time. As there is currently only one Top Nation it is that nation which makes the rules. Or breaks them.

    There is, however, pragmatism, which every nation engages in.
    I know you've just come back wowed by America but the idea that America rules the roost as it did, is nuts

    Go to East Asia (or indeed the Indian Ocean, or Africa, or Latin America) and you can feel the overwhelming power of China. Certainly equal to the USA

    There was a NYT piece t'other day which made the point that China will soon have such a huge chunk of global manufacturing it will be akin to Britain at the early peak of the Industrial Revolution, or America at the end of WW2. Hegemonic
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,807

    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:



    Substantive policy decisions will, in any event, be made by the government, not by the ambassador.
    Mandleson's job is to smooth the relationship with the US, not sabotage it; if he fails in that, he won't last long in post.

    Nicko Henderson was the ambassador when my father worked at the DC embassy. According to him, Henderson ran his own completely autonomous foreign policy and often wouldn't even pick up the phone when King Charles Street was calling. He was a distressed purchase by Thatcher who had to appoint him in a tearing hurry when Heath told her to shove the job up her narrow arse.

    NH was also a workaholic which was ill-matched to my father's overwhelming preference to spend his working day doing crosswords and perusing catalogues of model train bits.
    Sad for all concerned Heath not wanting to go to the US. There was very little point in the loathsome liver-spotted sack of bile remaining in the Commons.
    You didn’t like him? What did he do wrong?
    You feel he did something right?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,645

    On Latin..

    One thing that everyone should have to learn (preferably before they are legally allowed to utter it) is what etc means

    Ecksetra makes me wince. And why is it always repeated? Ecksetra, ecksetra.. My second wince is almost a gurn

    Et cetera means and the rest

    And the rest and the rest

    Who would say that?

    The difference between exempli gratia and id est should be next on the list

    No, everybody should learn Catullus 16.
    Maybe I am missing out, not knowing any Latin 🤭
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,932

    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:



    Substantive policy decisions will, in any event, be made by the government, not by the ambassador.
    Mandleson's job is to smooth the relationship with the US, not sabotage it; if he fails in that, he won't last long in post.

    Nicko Henderson was the ambassador when my father worked at the DC embassy. According to him, Henderson ran his own completely autonomous foreign policy and often wouldn't even pick up the phone when King Charles Street was calling. He was a distressed purchase by Thatcher who had to appoint him in a tearing hurry when Heath told her to shove the job up her narrow arse.

    NH was also a workaholic which was ill-matched to my father's overwhelming preference to spend his working day doing crosswords and perusing catalogues of model train bits.
    Sad for all concerned Heath not wanting to go to the US. There was very little point in the loathsome liver-spotted sack of bile remaining in the Commons.
    You didn’t like him? What did he do wrong?
    You feel he did something right?
    Joining the Common Market.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,888
    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

    That also makes you a fucking wanker.
    Hardly breaking news.
    Flaubert once said: Voyager rend modeste.

    How wrong he was.
    Well, we don't actually know what Leon was like before travel broadened his mind.
    Indeed, he only joined three or four years ago. We knew nothing of his opinions before that date.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,645

    Dura_Ace said:

    Nigelb said:



    Substantive policy decisions will, in any event, be made by the government, not by the ambassador.
    Mandleson's job is to smooth the relationship with the US, not sabotage it; if he fails in that, he won't last long in post.

    Nicko Henderson was the ambassador when my father worked at the DC embassy. According to him, Henderson ran his own completely autonomous foreign policy and often wouldn't even pick up the phone when King Charles Street was calling. He was a distressed purchase by Thatcher who had to appoint him in a tearing hurry when Heath told her to shove the job up her narrow arse.

    NH was also a workaholic which was ill-matched to my father's overwhelming preference to spend his working day doing crosswords and perusing catalogues of model train bits.
    Sad for all concerned Heath not wanting to go to the US. There was very little point in the loathsome liver-spotted sack of bile remaining in the Commons.
    You didn’t like him? What did he do wrong?
    You feel he did something right?
    Putting country out of the misery of the 1960s Labour in government.

    Decimalisation.

    Getting the French to allow us to join EEC.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,916

    Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
    Labour *don't know how* to level up.
    The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

    Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.
    This is why Reform’s message is so hard to counter. When you distrust Labour/Tories so much, as a regular voter on the street who feels ignored, why wouldn’t you give them a go?
    Because the vast majority of voters aren’t as ignorant and stupid as you are making out. They know the difference between a slogan and an actual policy.

    Reform vote will eventually be eaten up by the Conservatives, who are struggling to at moment as they shredded the parties long term vote winner for economic competence - but the process won’t be quick, and we’ll have to put up with several Labour governments before we get there.
    I don’t think those voters are stupid and did not say so.

    I do think that they have been badly served by the main two parties, and therefore they may be willing to roll the dice on an alternative. When you get to the point that normal politics has failed you, alternatives become more attractive.
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,932
    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
    Labour *don't know how* to level up.
    The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

    Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.
    Denmark works, up to a point

    Social democracy in many areas, but an antipathy to Wokeness and a fierce clampdown on migration and asylum

    It has

    1. Got the Danish Social Democrats re-elected, almost uniquely amongst left wing parties in Europe

    and

    2. The Danish economy is trotting along nicely, mainly thanks to Ozempic but still, it's growing

    If Farage is smart (which he is) he should offer exactly what they did
    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
    Labour *don't know how* to level up.
    The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

    Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.
    Denmark works, up to a point

    Social democracy in many areas, but an antipathy to Wokeness and a fierce clampdown on migration and asylum

    It has

    1. Got the Danish Social Democrats re-elected, almost uniquely amongst left wing parties in Europe

    and

    2. The Danish economy is trotting along nicely, mainly thanks to Ozempic but still, it's growing

    If Farage is smart (which he is) he should offer exactly what they did
    Farage is NOT a Social Democrat.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,046
    Leon said:

    TOPPING said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”
    I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.
    Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
    Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.
    No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers
    I try not to allow nascent nationalistic fervour colour my view here, but I've been a bit stumped what the perceived advantages fo that whole deal were supposed to be, particularly given how things have developed.

    At a pragmatic, practical level (which is how every other country seems to be playing it) did we get gain anything useful?

    Not that I disagree with the basic premise about weighing up options and taking heat out of politics generally.
    The advantage of the deal is that we stop being in breach of international law.
    But how much does that actually get us? That's a moral argument, and no one else in this matter seems to care about the moral position or the Chagossians, certainly not Mauritius or the UK. It doesn't appear to have gained us any goodwill with any party, so sure, no longer a breach, but given for all sides this seems to just be a transactional matter, I'm not particularly fussed on the moral position.
    I think it’s a good thing to uphold international law. The international rules-based order since World War II has done a relatively good job at maintaining peace and security compared to the first half of the 20th century or to the 19th century. I don’t think we win under the Strong Man approach to global politics of Putin, Trump and Netanyahu.

    It is also the case that upholding international law conspicuously helps in international relations. It is difficult to criticise other countries, e.g. Russia, Israel, for breaking international law if we’re also breaking it. Other countries do cite such matters.
    There is no such thing as international law. It is just the set of rules most recently agreed upon by whoever were Top Nations at the time. As there is currently only one Top Nation it is that nation which makes the rules. Or breaks them.

    There is, however, pragmatism, which every nation engages in.
    I know you've just come back wowed by America but the idea that America rules the roost as it did, is nuts

    Go to East Asia (or indeed the Indian Ocean, or Africa, or Latin America) and you can feel the overwhelming power of China. Certainly equal to the USA

    There was a NYT piece t'other day which made the point that China will soon have such a huge chunk of global manufacturing it will be akin to Britain at the early peak of the Industrial Revolution, or America at the end of WW2. Hegemonic
    China doesn't now, and never did see itself as the upholder of universal values. It doesn't project force or want to. It is (fiercely) protective about territories it believes are part of Greater China but aside from voicing the odd (usually conciliatory) view on global events, isn't about to send a task force to the Balkans. It is not hugely removed from cultivering its jardin (disputes about just what is in the jardin aside).

    The US, however, does see itself as the world's policeman and as the upholder of universal values.

    Is the difference.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,972

    Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
    Labour *don't know how* to level up.
    The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

    Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.
    Of course you’re completely right but it begs the question where does this mass of,voters go,once Reform inevitably fail ?
  • logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,932

    Scott_xP said:

    @sturdyAlex

    And so it begins.

    This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

    There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

    https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

    The Trump-Musk falling out is going to be absolutely spectacular. Alien vs Predator level stuff. I have no doubt who will come out on top.
    Ok, who?
    Oh, Trump, easily.
    In 5 years Trump will be an ex President but still a felon. His legal woes will have restarted.
    In 2 years time he will face a Democrat Senate and Congress and be able to do very little.
    Musk will probably be even richer.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,082
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

    Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

    Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

    Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.
    Labour fail the Red Wall
    The Tories fail the Red Wall

    Voters turn to Reform

    The political classes - The voters are at fault.

    To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.
    Labour *don't know how* to level up.
    The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

    Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.
    Of course you’re completely right but it begs the question where does this mass of,voters go,once Reform inevitably fail ?
    To the next party offering something more than “Fuck you very much, for voting for us.”
  • LeonLeon Posts: 56,496

    Nigelb said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    IanB2 said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Leon said:

    Interesting angle on Brexit

    It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

    https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

    I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.
    One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

    That also makes you a fucking wanker.
    Hardly breaking news.
    Flaubert once said: Voyager rend modeste.

    How wrong he was.
    Well, we don't actually know what Leon was like before travel broadened his mind.
    Indeed, he only joined three or four years ago. We knew nothing of his opinions before that date.
    @Dura_Ace should note, in addition, that Flaubert also said:

    "I am dreaming of hairless c**ts under cloudless skies"
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,420

    Jonathan said:

    Five years is a Long time. The right don’t seem to get that. Appear to be still in election mode and not thinking strategically.

    Nobody knows what the next election will bring. Can see almost any outcome.

    I think it (say 15%) not impossible that an entirely new party might win the next election.

    Whether that is just a new party or The New Party, is an issue, of course.
    Agreed, maybe. I don’t know that it’s as high as 15%, but I think it’s possible.

    You can currently get best odds on the winner (seats) at the next election of…

    Con 40%
    Lab 36.4%
    Reform UK 28.6%
    LibDem 2.0%
    Green 0.1%

    That adds to 107%. Is it worth laying everything? (I’ve not checked what odds you can get for laying them.)
Sign In or Register to comment.