Howdy, Stranger!

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

Britain Trump: Could it happen here? – politicalbetting.com

1235710

Comments

  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,208
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    Thanks for everybody's thoughts on the header. I would agree that a Parliamentary system does have a certain protection via leadership challenge or VONC, but on the other hand it is possible under FPTP to have a comfortable majority on only a third of the popular vote, far below what MAGA needed across the pond.

    There is considerable ongoing risk though with the imbalance between an executive that rules via perogative powers, and stacked and truncated discussion in the Commons. The Lords is increasingly poor at scrutiny too, with new Lords being political henchmen and donors rather than able to revise poorly written legislation.

    Thanks for the header, Foxy. A possible scenario is a majority Reform government, with red wall MPs (think many Lee Andersons) voting in a bloc to implement Trumpian policies. Would/could Farage stop them? It’s unlikely, but not impossible.
    While Reform is the most likely party to go Trumpist it isn't the only possibility. We could envisage another massive clearout of experienced MPs happens at the next GE in favour of poorly vetted newbies, for example the new Independents caucusing with Corbyn.
    Ed Davey and the 73 could go mad whilst camping in Somerset. Enid Blyton presages such things!
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,612
    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    Foxy said:

    Taz said:

    ydoethur said:

    Barnesian said:

    HYUFD said:

    Barnesian said:

    HYUFD said:

    Barnesian said:

    HYUFD said:

    algarkirk said:

    The much discussed Guardian article about Reform doing so well in Lab and Con territory

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/feb/02/reform-uk-can-win-scores-of-labour-seats-in-england-and-wales-says-study

    is very interesting. They are becoming a threat because the people starting to sympathise with it are not racists or extremes. It's mostly about the incompetence of all the others.

    I expect Reform to continue its process of detoxifying, deTrumpifying and making it clear that it is an old fashioned 1950s centrist social democratic party + nationalist + low migration policy + firmly anti racist (sotto voce: who have eccentric members some of them extreme, uncosted Noddy economics and no core of leaders, and no actual evidence of competence).

    Already all this 'Far Right wing' stuff loks very old fashioned.

    Reform is Thatcherite on economics and nationalist on culture and immigration.

    If you want social democracy or to rejoin the EU or single market or customs Union and a closer relationship with the EU you will vote Labour or LD. If you want socialism Green. If you want soft Brexit Thatcherism with a bit of anti woke for Badenoch’s Conservatives.

    Reform is the party for hard Brexit anti woke hardline anti immigration types who are mostly Thatcherites too
    Reform isn't Thatcherite on economics.
    It is proposing to provide lots of unfunded goodies including:

    Raising personal allowance for income tax to £20K
    Raising stamp duty threshold to £750K
    Extra £17b for the NHS
    Tax relief on school fees
    Big tax cuts for small businesses
    IHT threshold raised to £2m

    https://www.reformparty.uk/policies

    Very attractive shop window. But how's it going to be paid for?
    Where is the costed balanced budget?

    If you want free goodies, vote Reform.
    But you'll be disappointed.
    Farage is open to replacing the NHS with an insurance model and raising tax thresholds, tax relief on school fees and tax cuts for small businesses are Thatcherite policies too

    https://bylinetimes.com/2025/01/27/nigel-farages-latest-nhs-comments-spark-fresh-scrutiny-of-reform-uks-health-policy/
    Not if they are unfounded. Thatcher believed in sound money policies.
    Reform not so much. Reform would borrow the money. A bit like the last Tory Government.
    Farage wants to fund healthcare with insurance, which could largely end taxpayer funds for the NHS and be a big saving
    That's not in their policy document.
    This is what they say about the NHS. More unfunded goodies.


    https://assets.nationbuilder.com/reformuk/pages/253/attachments/original/1718625371/Reform_UK_Our_Contract_with_You.pdf?1718625371
    NHS have apparently (not sure if this is on Foxy's radar too) announced to staff that around 10-15% of admin jobs are to go at NHS England.

    So whether Farage is right or wrong he's missed the bus on that.
    Natural wastage or huge payoffs at the taxpayers expense ?
    Usually it's the first, but as a general rule with hiring freezes etc it is the most talented and able people that leave. This is because they have skills in demand elsewhere, while the duffers and timeservers don't get head-hunted.

    In particular the private outsourcing services will cherry pick the NHSE staff from contracting. They are pretty rubbish at running services, but very sharp at writing tight contracts that guarantee profits.
    I’m sure the NHS with all its CIPS trained Supply Chain teams will be equally adept at negotiating contracts and ensuring there are tight performance clauses in them.

    A contract is agreed by two parties not just imposed.

    As for the duffers if they are so poor why are they still there why aren’t HR managing their poor performance and getting them on performance plans and managing them out if needed ?
    I don't think that true. The widespread failures that we see in outsourcing companies are not just in the NHS. We seem them in prisons, PFI, schools, probation services, disability benefit assessments, children's homes, military recruitment and training and perhaps most spectacularly with the Post Office Counters scandal, yet the same companies repeatedly get new contracts and turn profits. The one thing that they are good at is writing contracts, and it's in large part because they pay more and devote more time to writing the contracts than the government quango signing them off.
    My point still applies whatever the public sector entity entering the contract is and many of these contracts both parties willingly enter into are standard terms on standard templates with a few specific performance terms and statement of work attached to it.

    To work in the public sector at a certain level when negotiating or managing contracts you have to be CIPS qualified.

    In terms of signing off there will be an internal process where all stakeholders will review the contract and agree it.

    There is nothing wrong with private companies making a profit.

    Where I think contract management is weak, in my experience, is managing changes in scope. The old ‘dollar mods’ syndrome we used to talk about in engineering.

    You can have any change you want but it will cost at least a dollar. Add a screw, that’s a dollar, remove a washer, another dollar.
  • TazTaz Posts: 16,612
    Scott_xP said:

    @ericlipton.nytimes.com‬

    F.A.A.’s Main Warning System for Pilots Is Down, U.S. Official Says www.nytimes.com/2025/02/02/u... Mike ives

    @elizabethodr.bsky.social‬

    Wonder if Elon has his trusted people in the software...
    "fixing it'??

    Why do these links with dots and the like no longer work.

    It was the same with bondezegou’s link to Wikipedia about pandemics.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    carnforth said:

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    If that’s a grammatical correction, it’s unnecessary.
    Decide was fine.
    Yes, Lucky is usually solid if rather 'trad' on grammar but here he errs.

    The "decide" is actually better because of the preceding "having".

    Without the "having" he'd have been correct to say "deciding" was the right word.
    Though the sentence is ambigous, or at least has a double meaning. Does it mean imagine a person being in the postion of having it decided for them, or imagine being a goverment being the position of ordering such a situation.
    Yes. William will say if I'm wrong but I think it was meant the first way.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,445
    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @ericlipton.nytimes.com‬

    F.A.A.’s Main Warning System for Pilots Is Down, U.S. Official Says www.nytimes.com/2025/02/02/u... Mike ives

    @elizabethodr.bsky.social‬

    Wonder if Elon has his trusted people in the software...
    "fixing it'??

    Why do these links with dots and the like no longer work.

    It was the same with bondezegou’s link to Wikipedia about pandemics.
    I think you have to use the full url, eg https://bsky.app/profile/elizabethodr.bsky.social
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 393
    Scott_xP said:

    @londonvinjamuri

    'Mexico is considering carousel retaliation, which would periodically rotate the U.S. products subject to retaliatory tariffs. This generates uncertainty in U.S. export sectors and has a political impact - agriculture is likely to lobby Congress.'

    "On October 2, 2019, a World Trade Organization (WTO) arbitrator rendered a decision that authorized the United States to apply retaliatory tariffs on as much as US$7.5 billion worth of European exports each year until WTO-illegal European subsidies to its aircraft industry were removed. In a press release issued that day, the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) announced that beginning October 18, the United States would apply WTO-approved tariffs on a list of EU products. The list included 10 percent duties on civil aircraft, but also 25 percent duties on goods we consume directly including butter, various cheeses, clementines, clams, green olives and single-malt Irish and Scotch Whiskies."
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,598
    kinabalu said:

    carnforth said:

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    If that’s a grammatical correction, it’s unnecessary.
    Decide was fine.
    Yes, Lucky is usually solid if rather 'trad' on grammar but here he errs.

    The "decide" is actually better because of the preceding "having".

    Without the "having" he'd have been correct to say "deciding" was the right word.
    Though the sentence is ambigous, or at least has a double meaning. Does it mean imagine a person being in the postion of having it decided for them, or imagine being a goverment being the position of ordering such a situation.
    Yes. William will say if I'm wrong but I think it was meant the first way.
    Yes, it was meant the first way. I was implying that the Canadians might be in need of liberation.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    I wouldn't go that far.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920

    kinabalu said:

    carnforth said:

    kinabalu said:

    Nigelb said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    If that’s a grammatical correction, it’s unnecessary.
    Decide was fine.
    Yes, Lucky is usually solid if rather 'trad' on grammar but here he errs.

    The "decide" is actually better because of the preceding "having".

    Without the "having" he'd have been correct to say "deciding" was the right word.
    Though the sentence is ambigous, or at least has a double meaning. Does it mean imagine a person being in the postion of having it decided for them, or imagine being a goverment being the position of ordering such a situation.
    Yes. William will say if I'm wrong but I think it was meant the first way.
    Yes, it was meant the first way. I was implying that the Canadians might be in need of liberation.
    Or libation even.

    BOOM BOOM
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,156

    GIN1138 said:

    Question for PB brains: Are all these tariffs flying around likely to stoke up inflation globally or will they have an overall dampening effect on economic activity?

    Quite possibly both. Soaring prices of some goods, plus a global recession.

    Wouldn’t that be fun?
    NYT

    “Analysts at Goldman Sachs have said that if Mr. Trump proceeds with across-the-board tariffs, it would both raise prices in the United States and slow economic growth.”
    WSJ was more scathing.

    The Dumbest Trade War in History

    ...President Trump will fire his first tariff salvo on Saturday against those notorious American adversaries . . . Mexico and Canada. They’ll get hit with a 25% border tax, while China, a real adversary, will endure 10%. This reminds us of the old Bernard Lewis joke that it’s risky to be America’s enemy but it can be fatal to be its friend.
    Leaving China aside, Mr. Trump’s justification for this economic assault on the neighbors makes no sense...
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,445
    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,836
    edited February 2
    Leon said:

    I see the most-read article on the Spectator is a ridiculous Threnody for Empire

    Astro-Hungarian or the one that Struck Back?
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,178
    Whenever "The Art of the Deal" is mentioned, I am reminded of a American athlete -- I think a Philadelphia baseball player -- who was asked about something in a book that had been ghost written for him. He said something like this: "I don't know. I haven't read that part yet."
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,156
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Black Doves is very entertaining. Great script, some brilliant characters

    However a lot of it demands serious suspension of disbelief. Most unbelievable of all: the idea a humble Minister for Defence could live in a spectacular Georgian house in central-ish London

    I reviewed in a few weeks back: ‘absurd but entertaining’.
    It doesn’t make the mistake of taking itself at all seriously.
    Yes. It also carries it all off in high style and makes you care - a bit - about the characters even tho it is basically a cartoon

    Very enjoyable. Hope they do another series
    Clearly intended, but will depend on the ratings (which look OK).
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,189
    Interesting piece writing about America as if it was another country about which we know less:

    https://www.doomsdayscenario.co/p/musk-s-junta-establishes-him-as-head-of-government

    From

    https://bsky.app/profile/vermontgmg.bsky.social/post/3lh4uoe3gkk2s
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,208
    edited February 2
    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    If that happens and they get into government surely you'll pretty much be restricted to Bulgarian Hotels, and re-Education holidays on the Isle of Wight?

    Each to his own.

    Edit: I imagine I meant Hungarian
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 52,958

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    We should do the same. No Bud Lite. No Oreo cookies. No McDonalds. No Jack Daniels. No Coca Cola. What an improvement in our diet!
    For your insults to Mr John Daniels Esq. I declare you guilty.

    {black cap}

    You shall be taken hence to a place of punishment. There to be confined with Piers Corbyn, Piers Morgan and Julian Assange. In one cell. The TV will be set to GB News, with no volume control. Simultaneous, the worst Radiohead song will play on a loop. forever. A laptop will allow you to read the comments on Con Home, program in Python. And nothing else.

    May The Lord Have No Mercy On Your Soul.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,445
    Foxy said:
    Interesting, yes. Also a bit horrifying... :(
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,598
    Foxy said:
    Although that could be used to make the opposite point that much of what is written about foreign countries is ignorant rubbish.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,345

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    We should do the same. No Bud Lite. No Oreo cookies. No McDonalds. No Jack Daniels. No Coca Cola. What an improvement in our diet!
    For your insults to Mr John Daniels Esq. I declare you guilty.

    {black cap}

    You shall be taken hence to a place of punishment. There to be confined with Piers Corbyn, Piers Morgan and Julian Assange. In one cell. The TV will be set to GB News, with no volume control. Simultaneous, the worst Radiohead song will play on a loop. forever. A laptop will allow you to read the comments on Con Home, program in Python. And nothing else.

    May The Lord Have No Mercy On Your Soul.
    As long as you listen to the entire Radiohead playlist in order to choose the worst song, I accept the punishment.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,208
    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    I wonder when their affair started?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    Omnium said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    I wonder when their affair started?
    Well it's over now.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,445
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Black Doves is very entertaining. Great script, some brilliant characters

    However a lot of it demands serious suspension of disbelief. Most unbelievable of all: the idea a humble Minister for Defence could live in a spectacular Georgian house in central-ish London

    I reviewed in a few weeks back: ‘absurd but entertaining’.
    It doesn’t make the mistake of taking itself at all seriously.
    Yes. It also carries it all off in high style and makes you care - a bit - about the characters even tho it is basically a cartoon

    Very enjoyable. Hope they do another series
    Clearly intended, but will depend on the ratings (which look OK).
    Apparently already underway. Season 2 due in 2026. Bit slow but 👍

    I liked how they made london look glamorous. We could do with a bit more of that

    London is a magical city - outside of November, January, February and early March - we need more image-makes to celebrate it
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,208
    kinabalu said:

    Omnium said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    I wonder when their affair started?
    Well it's over now.
    Makes you believe in forces beyond our ken :)


    (He was a one, that Ken!)
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173

    Foxy said:

    Thanks for everybody's thoughts on the header. I would agree that a Parliamentary system does have a certain protection via leadership challenge or VONC, but on the other hand it is possible under FPTP to have a comfortable majority on only a third of the popular vote, far below what MAGA needed across the pond.

    There is considerable ongoing risk though with the imbalance between an executive that rules via perogative powers, and stacked and truncated discussion in the Commons. The Lords is increasingly poor at scrutiny too, with new Lords being political henchmen and donors rather than able to revise poorly written legislation.

    Thanks for the header, Foxy. A possible scenario is a majority Reform government, with red wall MPs (think many Lee Andersons) voting in a bloc to implement Trumpian policies. Would/could Farage stop them? It’s unlikely, but not impossible.
    But the Red Wall only returns a modest fraction of Parliament. The notion of any kind of Parliamentary majority for Reform rests either on mass defections by Labour voters in the core cities, or by both Conservative and Liberal Democrat voters in Southern England. Both scenarios are (a) highly improbable and (b) would require Reform to turn itself into a different party to attract such people.

    They can become a substantial and very loud opposition group by steamrollering Labour MPs in poor white people places, but significant expansion beyond those boundaries looks like a Herculean task for them.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,914
    Foxy said:
    As far as I can tell, it’s largely accurate.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,914
    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    You should collect these little apercus and publish them as a comic diary. You’re a modern Grossmith.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,445

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    You should collect these little apercus and publish them as a comic diary. You’re a modern Grossmith.
    I sometimes wonder if @kinabalu is a great comic creation

    If so 👏👏👏
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,559
    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    biggles said:

    Sean_F said:

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Remainers before the vote: "This will be shit"

    Brexiteers before the vote" "This will be brilliant"

    Remainers now: "This is shit"

    Brexiteers now: "Waaaaaaaaaaaa. IT'S NOT OUR FAULT. Waaaaaaaaaaaa"

    I can genuinely say the only impact Brexit has had on my life is that I now have to get a stamp in my passport when I go to Europe. Something I actually quite like. Admittedly, it seems to have impacted you more than most though.
    Its had minimal impact on my life and where I work too. A couple of suppliers changed to FOB from DDP aside from that nothing much.

    The biggest impact I’ve seen is online forums, like this, with the odd diehard FBPE Brexit obsessive ranting about it endlessly. FBPE and Brexit are two terms I muted on twitter ad my experience there is all the better for it.
    I doubt it's had any impact upon Scott's life, either. People get worked up online about all sorts of things that don't impact upon them.
    Yes, the secret truth of Brexit is that very few people have noticed any real difference.

    This annoys some who were Brexiteers because it was not a cure all. It also annoys many who were Remainers because the world has not ended, so they keep looking for edge cases to get excited over.

    In reality the impact is a bit of irritation in export focused sectors who had got used to not having to think of EU sales as exports, and a tiny impact on GDP; but we are now so far into the counterfactual no one knows by how much. Certainly, looking at EU economic performance it’s hard to argue that continued membership would have seen us do any better.

    The continued tears are because those who know what the process of joining the EU would mean also know us doing so is now inconceivable.

    Wittering on about it is a waste of everyone’s time.
    It absorbed virtually all the political resource of the country for half a decade. That in itself is a huge cost. You'd expect big tangible benefits as a result. If the very best one can conclude is that the impact is no big deal either way the project can only be deemed a fail.
    That wasn't intrinsic to a Leave vote - an awful lot of the bandwidth was consumed battling the sore losers, led, of course, by Starmer.
    Yes. And the ERG nutters. But whatever, it was a 5 year shitshow.
    Sure. But the ERG nutters in the end got cast as sane - or, at least, democratic - as they were the only people arguing to implement the referendum result come what may.
    They blocked the exit deal their own PM had negotiated. They (and the DUP) are no less to blame for the prolonged chaos than the opposition parties and the handful of hard Con Remainers.
    Except that it should never have got to the point where they could have helped block the deal. There was always a natural majority for a soft Leave type deal, if only the Remainers hadn't been like the dog at the river,
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,826
    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,880
    Leon said:

    I see the most-read article on the Spectator is a ridiculous Threnody for Empire

    Bravo!
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,166
    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    I think he was very lucky to get off with manslaughter tbh.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    You should collect these little apercus and publish them as a comic diary. You’re a modern Grossmith.
    I will certainly (on a google) take that.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,624
    Omnium said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    If that happens and they get into government surely you'll pretty much be restricted to Bulgarian Hotels, and re-Education holidays on the Isle of Wight?

    Each to his own.

    Edit: I imagine I meant Hungarian
    Didn't that 'gay donkey raped my horse guy' end up in Bulgaria?
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,208

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
    Maybe the Greens could join in and all tie at 19%?

    It's quite nuts that a sensible party like the LDs are so held back by their leader that they can't make ground when all other parties are failing, and yet a 2nd bunch of the insane could come up on the rails.

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    You should collect these little apercus and publish them as a comic diary. You’re a modern Grossmith.
    I sometimes wonder if @kinabalu is a great comic creation

    If so 👏👏👏
    Don't spoil it.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 52,958

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    I think he was very lucky to get off with manslaughter tbh.
    Even the more… convivial American cops recommend making sure all the holes are in the front of your legally challenged acquaintances.

    Even in Texas, shot in the back while running looks poor. Unsporting, frankly.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,208
    ydoethur said:

    Omnium said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    If that happens and they get into government surely you'll pretty much be restricted to Bulgarian Hotels, and re-Education holidays on the Isle of Wight?

    Each to his own.

    Edit: I imagine I meant Hungarian
    Didn't that 'gay donkey raped my horse guy' end up in Bulgaria?
    That clearly has no connection whatsoever with Leon. None. Definitely not. Although he's not been to Bulgaria since.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,598

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
    What's the most extreme result? The Greens in first place but only winning 2 seats?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,189
    pigeon said:

    Foxy said:

    Thanks for everybody's thoughts on the header. I would agree that a Parliamentary system does have a certain protection via leadership challenge or VONC, but on the other hand it is possible under FPTP to have a comfortable majority on only a third of the popular vote, far below what MAGA needed across the pond.

    There is considerable ongoing risk though with the imbalance between an executive that rules via perogative powers, and stacked and truncated discussion in the Commons. The Lords is increasingly poor at scrutiny too, with new Lords being political henchmen and donors rather than able to revise poorly written legislation.

    Thanks for the header, Foxy. A possible scenario is a majority Reform government, with red wall MPs (think many Lee Andersons) voting in a bloc to implement Trumpian policies. Would/could Farage stop them? It’s unlikely, but not impossible.
    But the Red Wall only returns a modest fraction of Parliament. The notion of any kind of Parliamentary majority for Reform rests either on mass defections by Labour voters in the core cities, or by both Conservative and Liberal Democrat voters in Southern England. Both scenarios are (a) highly improbable and (b) would require Reform to turn itself into a different party to attract such people.

    They can become a substantial and very loud opposition group by steamrollering Labour MPs in poor white people places, but significant expansion beyond those boundaries looks like a Herculean task for them.
    Reform did rather well in the Shire counties across much of England too, often second or third. "Red Wall" type voters exist nationwide.

    I agree though that getting a majority is a long shot even if the polling doesn't change in the next 4 years. If they did manage it, many of the gains would be from the Tories.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 52,958
    Omnium said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
    Maybe the Greens could join in and all tie at 19%?

    It's quite nuts that a sensible party like the LDs are so held back by their leader that they can't make ground when all other parties are failing, and yet a 2nd bunch of the insane could come up on the rails.

    It’s not the leader.

    Lab and Con are on core vote. Reform is the anti-Lib Dems. The Greens are Spare Labour - Corbynites if you are lucky.

    Where are the Lib Dems going to get liberal democratic votes from?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,541
    geoffw said:

    Leon said:

    I see the most-read article on the Spectator is a ridiculous Threnody for Empire

    Bravo!
    *Huzzah!
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,445
    Leon said:

    I see the most-read article on the Spectator is a ridiculous Threnody for Empire

    Written by one raddled old tart who used to post on here called @SeanT. Who knows what misadventures he is on? Well, an archive link is here: https://archive.is/SCjpE

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    biggles said:

    Sean_F said:

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Remainers before the vote: "This will be shit"

    Brexiteers before the vote" "This will be brilliant"

    Remainers now: "This is shit"

    Brexiteers now: "Waaaaaaaaaaaa. IT'S NOT OUR FAULT. Waaaaaaaaaaaa"

    I can genuinely say the only impact Brexit has had on my life is that I now have to get a stamp in my passport when I go to Europe. Something I actually quite like. Admittedly, it seems to have impacted you more than most though.
    Its had minimal impact on my life and where I work too. A couple of suppliers changed to FOB from DDP aside from that nothing much.

    The biggest impact I’ve seen is online forums, like this, with the odd diehard FBPE Brexit obsessive ranting about it endlessly. FBPE and Brexit are two terms I muted on twitter ad my experience there is all the better for it.
    I doubt it's had any impact upon Scott's life, either. People get worked up online about all sorts of things that don't impact upon them.
    Yes, the secret truth of Brexit is that very few people have noticed any real difference.

    This annoys some who were Brexiteers because it was not a cure all. It also annoys many who were Remainers because the world has not ended, so they keep looking for edge cases to get excited over.

    In reality the impact is a bit of irritation in export focused sectors who had got used to not having to think of EU sales as exports, and a tiny impact on GDP; but we are now so far into the counterfactual no one knows by how much. Certainly, looking at EU economic performance it’s hard to argue that continued membership would have seen us do any better.

    The continued tears are because those who know what the process of joining the EU would mean also know us doing so is now inconceivable.

    Wittering on about it is a waste of everyone’s time.
    It absorbed virtually all the political resource of the country for half a decade. That in itself is a huge cost. You'd expect big tangible benefits as a result. If the very best one can conclude is that the impact is no big deal either way the project can only be deemed a fail.
    That wasn't intrinsic to a Leave vote - an awful lot of the bandwidth was consumed battling the sore losers, led, of course, by Starmer.
    Yes. And the ERG nutters. But whatever, it was a 5 year shitshow.
    Sure. But the ERG nutters in the end got cast as sane - or, at least, democratic - as they were the only people arguing to implement the referendum result come what may.
    They blocked the exit deal their own PM had negotiated. They (and the DUP) are no less to blame for the prolonged chaos than the opposition parties and the handful of hard Con Remainers.
    Except that it should never have got to the point where they could have helped block the deal. There was always a natural majority for a soft Leave type deal, if only the Remainers hadn't been like the dog at the river,
    Etc etc. Most done to death debate ever. So let me just sum up and conclude. It was incumbent on the governing Conservative party to negotiate and conclude the best Brexit deal they could in a timely and efficient manner. They failed abjectly to do so.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,208

    Omnium said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
    Maybe the Greens could join in and all tie at 19%?

    It's quite nuts that a sensible party like the LDs are so held back by their leader that they can't make ground when all other parties are failing, and yet a 2nd bunch of the insane could come up on the rails.

    It’s not the leader.

    Lab and Con are on core vote. Reform is the anti-Lib Dems. The Greens are Spare Labour - Corbynites if you are lucky.

    Where are the Lib Dems going to get liberal democratic votes from?
    You may well be right. What did the 'Alliance' poll (opinion polls) in the 80s though - something like 45%?
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,559
    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Looking forward to the "Tories tied for first" header.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,208
    Driver said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Looking forward to the "Tories tied for first" header.
    The LD bar chart should be a cracker too.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173
    Foxy said:

    pigeon said:

    Foxy said:

    Thanks for everybody's thoughts on the header. I would agree that a Parliamentary system does have a certain protection via leadership challenge or VONC, but on the other hand it is possible under FPTP to have a comfortable majority on only a third of the popular vote, far below what MAGA needed across the pond.

    There is considerable ongoing risk though with the imbalance between an executive that rules via perogative powers, and stacked and truncated discussion in the Commons. The Lords is increasingly poor at scrutiny too, with new Lords being political henchmen and donors rather than able to revise poorly written legislation.

    Thanks for the header, Foxy. A possible scenario is a majority Reform government, with red wall MPs (think many Lee Andersons) voting in a bloc to implement Trumpian policies. Would/could Farage stop them? It’s unlikely, but not impossible.
    But the Red Wall only returns a modest fraction of Parliament. The notion of any kind of Parliamentary majority for Reform rests either on mass defections by Labour voters in the core cities, or by both Conservative and Liberal Democrat voters in Southern England. Both scenarios are (a) highly improbable and (b) would require Reform to turn itself into a different party to attract such people.

    They can become a substantial and very loud opposition group by steamrollering Labour MPs in poor white people places, but significant expansion beyond those boundaries looks like a Herculean task for them.
    Reform did rather well in the Shire counties across much of England too, often second or third. "Red Wall" type voters exist nationwide.

    I agree though that getting a majority is a long shot even if the polling doesn't change in the next 4 years. If they did manage it, many of the gains would be from the Tories.
    The Liberal Democrats used to stack up tonnes of useless second and third places before the Coalition, and much good it did them. Reform got 8,500 votes round my way but it hasn't a snowball's chance in Hades of coming from that position to win: if Labour faceplants the seat will just go straight back to the Tories.

    Realistically, Reform probably only becomes a serious contender for Government if it can reassemble the Boris Johnson voter coalition. That's a huge ask.
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,915
    glw said:

    What does the Very Stable Genius have to say this morning (in the US)?

    The “Tariff Lobby,” headed by the Globalist, and always wrong, Wall Street Journal, is working hard to justify Countries like Canada, Mexico, China, and too many others to name, continue the decades long RIPOFF OF AMERICA, both with regard to TRADE, CRIME, AND POISONOUS DRUGS that are allowed to so freely flow into AMERICA. THOSE DAYS ARE OVER! The USA has major deficits with Canada, Mexico, and China (and almost all countries!), owes 36 Trillion Dollars, and we’re not going to be the “Stupid Country” any longer. MAKE YOUR PRODUCT IN THE USA AND THERE ARE NO TARIFFS! Why should the United States lose TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN SUBSIDIZING OTHER COUNTRIES, and why should these other countries pay a small fraction of the cost of what USA citizens pay for Drugs and Pharmaceuticals, as an example? THIS WILL BE THE GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICA! WILL THERE BE SOME PAIN? YES, MAYBE (AND MAYBE NOT!). BUT WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, AND IT WILL ALL BE WORTH THE PRICE THAT MUST BE PAID. WE ARE A COUNTRY THAT IS NOW BEING RUN WITH COMMON SENSE — AND THE RESULTS WILL BE SPECTACULAR!!!


    We pay hundreds of Billions of Dollars to SUBSIDIZE Canada. Why? There is no reason. We don’t need anything they have. We have unlimited Energy, should make our own Cars, and have more Lumber than we can ever use. Without this massive subsidy, Canada ceases to exist as a viable Country. Harsh but true! Therefore, Canada should become our Cherished 51st State. Much lower taxes, and far better military protection for the people of Canada — AND NO TARIFFS!


    Absolutely raving nuts. Also dumb as a box of rocks.
    Did he (Trump) actually post this?

    If he was in any other position, the nurse would be wheeling him away with the comment, "Sure, sure grandad; now let's get your hot chocolate made and you tucked up into bed."
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,108
    viewcode said:

    Foxy said:
    Interesting, yes. Also a bit horrifying... :(
    It's not a 'bit' horrifying. It's horrifying!
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    I think he was very lucky to get off with manslaughter tbh.
    Yes. He was BNP too.

    That's one less Reform vote anyway.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,785
    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    biggles said:

    Sean_F said:

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Remainers before the vote: "This will be shit"

    Brexiteers before the vote" "This will be brilliant"

    Remainers now: "This is shit"

    Brexiteers now: "Waaaaaaaaaaaa. IT'S NOT OUR FAULT. Waaaaaaaaaaaa"

    I can genuinely say the only impact Brexit has had on my life is that I now have to get a stamp in my passport when I go to Europe. Something I actually quite like. Admittedly, it seems to have impacted you more than most though.
    Its had minimal impact on my life and where I work too. A couple of suppliers changed to FOB from DDP aside from that nothing much.

    The biggest impact I’ve seen is online forums, like this, with the odd diehard FBPE Brexit obsessive ranting about it endlessly. FBPE and Brexit are two terms I muted on twitter ad my experience there is all the better for it.
    I doubt it's had any impact upon Scott's life, either. People get worked up online about all sorts of things that don't impact upon them.
    Yes, the secret truth of Brexit is that very few people have noticed any real difference.

    This annoys some who were Brexiteers because it was not a cure all. It also annoys many who were Remainers because the world has not ended, so they keep looking for edge cases to get excited over.

    In reality the impact is a bit of irritation in export focused sectors who had got used to not having to think of EU sales as exports, and a tiny impact on GDP; but we are now so far into the counterfactual no one knows by how much. Certainly, looking at EU economic performance it’s hard to argue that continued membership would have seen us do any better.

    The continued tears are because those who know what the process of joining the EU would mean also know us doing so is now inconceivable.

    Wittering on about it is a waste of everyone’s time.
    It absorbed virtually all the political resource of the country for half a decade. That in itself is a huge cost. You'd expect big tangible benefits as a result. If the very best one can conclude is that the impact is no big deal either way the project can only be deemed a fail.
    That wasn't intrinsic to a Leave vote - an awful lot of the bandwidth was consumed battling the sore losers, led, of course, by Starmer.
    Yes. And the ERG nutters. But whatever, it was a 5 year shitshow.
    Sure. But the ERG nutters in the end got cast as sane - or, at least, democratic - as they were the only people arguing to implement the referendum result come what may.
    They blocked the exit deal their own PM had negotiated. They (and the DUP) are no less to blame for the prolonged chaos than the opposition parties and the handful of hard Con Remainers.
    Except that it should never have got to the point where they could have helped block the deal. There was always a natural majority for a soft Leave type deal, if only the Remainers hadn't been like the dog at the river,
    Etc etc. Most done to death debate ever. So let me just sum up and conclude. It was incumbent on the governing Conservative party to negotiate and conclude the best Brexit deal they could in a timely and efficient manner. They failed abjectly to do so.
    More than a whiff of X hasn’t been done properly because Y were a bit rubbish but mainly because they were impeded by Z.
    Sure I’ve heard a variation of that before.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,803
    edited February 2
    snip
  • TheValiantTheValiant Posts: 1,915

    GIN1138 said:

    Question for PB brains: Are all these tariffs flying around likely to stoke up inflation globally or will they have an overall dampening effect on economic activity?

    Quite possibly both. Soaring prices of some goods, plus a global recession.

    Wouldn’t that be fun?
    NYT

    “Analysts at Goldman Sachs have said that if Mr. Trump proceeds with across-the-board tariffs, it would both raise prices in the United States and slow economic growth.”
    For the sake of balance, what do they predict would be the increase in GDP if Canada were annexed by the USA?
    The United States. A trade war with China, trying to annex Canada (and Mexico).....

    I'm sure this'll end well..... nothing to see here. Move along.


  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,445
    edited February 2
    pigeon said:

    Foxy said:

    pigeon said:

    Foxy said:

    Thanks for everybody's thoughts on the header. I would agree that a Parliamentary system does have a certain protection via leadership challenge or VONC, but on the other hand it is possible under FPTP to have a comfortable majority on only a third of the popular vote, far below what MAGA needed across the pond.

    There is considerable ongoing risk though with the imbalance between an executive that rules via perogative powers, and stacked and truncated discussion in the Commons. The Lords is increasingly poor at scrutiny too, with new Lords being political henchmen and donors rather than able to revise poorly written legislation.

    Thanks for the header, Foxy. A possible scenario is a majority Reform government, with red wall MPs (think many Lee Andersons) voting in a bloc to implement Trumpian policies. Would/could Farage stop them? It’s unlikely, but not impossible.
    But the Red Wall only returns a modest fraction of Parliament. The notion of any kind of Parliamentary majority for Reform rests either on mass defections by Labour voters in the core cities, or by both Conservative and Liberal Democrat voters in Southern England. Both scenarios are (a) highly improbable and (b) would require Reform to turn itself into a different party to attract such people.

    They can become a substantial and very loud opposition group by steamrollering Labour MPs in poor white people places, but significant expansion beyond those boundaries looks like a Herculean task for them.
    Reform did rather well in the Shire counties across much of England too, often second or third. "Red Wall" type voters exist nationwide.

    I agree though that getting a majority is a long shot even if the polling doesn't change in the next 4 years. If they did manage it, many of the gains would be from the Tories.
    The Liberal Democrats used to stack up tonnes of useless second and third places before the Coalition, and much good it did them. Reform got 8,500 votes round my way but it hasn't a snowball's chance in Hades of coming from that position to win: if Labour faceplants the seat will just go straight back to the Tories.

    Realistically, Reform probably only becomes a serious contender for Government if it can reassemble the Boris Johnson voter coalition. That's a huge ask.
    You are delusional

    Reform are fast becoming the default option for a vast swathe of people

    Why? Because we’ve tried everything else. Including the Lib Dems in the Coalition. And no party seems able to arrest British decay. Especially Labour and the Tories

    On top of that, the whole western world is moving sharply to the hard right - to zero net migration and much fiercer defense of national interests

    Reform thus benefit twice over

    I’d have them as favourites to win a majority in 2028
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 29,835

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,559

    Omnium said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
    Maybe the Greens could join in and all tie at 19%?

    It's quite nuts that a sensible party like the LDs are so held back by their leader that they can't make ground when all other parties are failing, and yet a 2nd bunch of the insane could come up on the rails.

    It’s not the leader.

    Lab and Con are on core vote. Reform is the anti-Lib Dems. The Greens are Spare Labour - Corbynites if you are lucky.

    Where are the Lib Dems going to get liberal democratic votes from?
    Especially given that most voters are old enough to remember that they've been in government recently.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 58,445

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
    All doubts could have been avoided with better, punchier writing

    “Imagine. A government Liquor Control Board decides what alcoholic drinks you can buy! 🫣”

    Better. And no dispute over grammar
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,559
    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    biggles said:

    Sean_F said:

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Remainers before the vote: "This will be shit"

    Brexiteers before the vote" "This will be brilliant"

    Remainers now: "This is shit"

    Brexiteers now: "Waaaaaaaaaaaa. IT'S NOT OUR FAULT. Waaaaaaaaaaaa"

    I can genuinely say the only impact Brexit has had on my life is that I now have to get a stamp in my passport when I go to Europe. Something I actually quite like. Admittedly, it seems to have impacted you more than most though.
    Its had minimal impact on my life and where I work too. A couple of suppliers changed to FOB from DDP aside from that nothing much.

    The biggest impact I’ve seen is online forums, like this, with the odd diehard FBPE Brexit obsessive ranting about it endlessly. FBPE and Brexit are two terms I muted on twitter ad my experience there is all the better for it.
    I doubt it's had any impact upon Scott's life, either. People get worked up online about all sorts of things that don't impact upon them.
    Yes, the secret truth of Brexit is that very few people have noticed any real difference.

    This annoys some who were Brexiteers because it was not a cure all. It also annoys many who were Remainers because the world has not ended, so they keep looking for edge cases to get excited over.

    In reality the impact is a bit of irritation in export focused sectors who had got used to not having to think of EU sales as exports, and a tiny impact on GDP; but we are now so far into the counterfactual no one knows by how much. Certainly, looking at EU economic performance it’s hard to argue that continued membership would have seen us do any better.

    The continued tears are because those who know what the process of joining the EU would mean also know us doing so is now inconceivable.

    Wittering on about it is a waste of everyone’s time.
    It absorbed virtually all the political resource of the country for half a decade. That in itself is a huge cost. You'd expect big tangible benefits as a result. If the very best one can conclude is that the impact is no big deal either way the project can only be deemed a fail.
    That wasn't intrinsic to a Leave vote - an awful lot of the bandwidth was consumed battling the sore losers, led, of course, by Starmer.
    Yes. And the ERG nutters. But whatever, it was a 5 year shitshow.
    Sure. But the ERG nutters in the end got cast as sane - or, at least, democratic - as they were the only people arguing to implement the referendum result come what may.
    They blocked the exit deal their own PM had negotiated. They (and the DUP) are no less to blame for the prolonged chaos than the opposition parties and the handful of hard Con Remainers.
    Except that it should never have got to the point where they could have helped block the deal. There was always a natural majority for a soft Leave type deal, if only the Remainers hadn't been like the dog at the river,
    Etc etc. Most done to death debate ever. So let me just sum up and conclude. It was incumbent on the governing Conservative party to negotiate and conclude the best Brexit deal they could in a timely and efficient manner. They failed abjectly to do so.
    I disagree. They got the best deal they could when in the crucial years, a majority in parliament and the Speaker of the House of Commons and the judges of the supreme court were all trying as hard as they could to prevent any deal at all.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,166

    Omnium said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
    Maybe the Greens could join in and all tie at 19%?

    It's quite nuts that a sensible party like the LDs are so held back by their leader that they can't make ground when all other parties are failing, and yet a 2nd bunch of the insane could come up on the rails.

    It’s not the leader.

    Lab and Con are on core vote. Reform is the anti-Lib Dems. The Greens are Spare Labour - Corbynites if you are lucky.

    Where are the Lib Dems going to get liberal democratic votes from?
    Do we know how many in the poll were don't know or won't say?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,915
    edited February 2
    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
    All doubts could have been avoided with better, punchier writing

    “Imagine. A government Liquor Control Board decides what alcoholic drinks you can buy! 🫣”

    Better. And no dispute over grammar
    "Tho" or "Though"?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 29,835
    edited February 2
    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
    All doubts could have been avoided with better, punchier writing

    “Imagine. A government Liquor Control Board decides what alcoholic drinks you can buy! 🫣”

    Better. And no dispute over grammar
    That would have been clearer. As it was, one couldn't tell whether WilliamGlen meant to write 'deciding', or 'to decide', which would have altered the meaning. I presume he meant 'deciding', so that's why I wrote what I did.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,189
    edited February 2

    Omnium said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
    Maybe the Greens could join in and all tie at 19%?

    It's quite nuts that a sensible party like the LDs are so held back by their leader that they can't make ground when all other parties are failing, and yet a 2nd bunch of the insane could come up on the rails.

    It’s not the leader.

    Lab and Con are on core vote. Reform is the anti-Lib Dems. The Greens are Spare Labour - Corbynites if you are lucky.

    Where are the Lib Dems going to get liberal democratic votes from?
    I am not sure there really exists a core vote for any party. Even @HYUFD, the only Tory in the PB village, is now flirting with Reform.

    LDs are the most transfer friendly of parties and can squeeze Labour, Green and One Nation Tories fairly readily, hence the formidable by-election machine, though can get similarly squeezed elsewhere. Further gains at the next GE are not easy, but not unlikely either. Voters know now who is the challenger in their seat.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,836
    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    Ok. If this keeps happening - let me know and I'll give you a list of people to have little chats with your wife about.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,439
    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    An academic bloke who researched this sort of stuff fairly rigorously is the late Ian Stevenson, University of Virginia. His apparently robust data, much about reincarnation and also weird cognitions and precognitions like this one (this one is fairly mild by his standards, I think he would it put down as interesting coincidence) is bizarre and extraordinary. Personally i find his stuff uncomfortable because I would mostly prefer him to be wrong.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,217

    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
    All doubts could have been avoided with better, punchier writing

    “Imagine. A government Liquor Control Board decides what alcoholic drinks you can buy! 🫣”

    Better. And no dispute over grammar
    That would have been clearer. As it was, one couldn't tell whether WilliamGlen meant to write 'deciding', or 'to decide', which would have altered the meaning. I presume he meant 'deciding', so that's why I wrote what I did.
    Who gives a toss? We knew what @williamglenn meant and we aren't school children.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,624
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
    All doubts could have been avoided with better, punchier writing

    “Imagine. A government Liquor Control Board decides what alcoholic drinks you can buy! 🫣”

    Better. And no dispute over grammar
    That would have been clearer. As it was, one couldn't tell whether WilliamGlen meant to write 'deciding', or 'to decide', which would have altered the meaning. I presume he meant 'deciding', so that's why I wrote what I did.
    Who gives a toss? We knew what @williamglenn meant and we aren't school children.
    Just as we all knew what he meant when he said this yesterday:

    American democracy is disintegrating.

    One small example, should we really now believe air safety investigations? Another - will anyone really care about the ~5,000 transgender military personnel set to lose their jobs?

    Tariffs announced overnight are set to cost the average American household roughly $2,000 per annum.

    Supporters of the German Democratic Republic felt the same way about the wall coming down.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,624
    Just seen the scorecard.

    What does Jos Buttler have to do to get the sack?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 29,835
    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
    All doubts could have been avoided with better, punchier writing

    “Imagine. A government Liquor Control Board decides what alcoholic drinks you can buy! 🫣”

    Better. And no dispute over grammar
    That would have been clearer. As it was, one couldn't tell whether WilliamGlen meant to write 'deciding', or 'to decide', which would have altered the meaning. I presume he meant 'deciding', so that's why I wrote what I did.
    Who gives a toss? We knew what @williamglenn meant and we aren't school children.
    Who gives a toss about what any of us posts here? He can choose to give what I said consideration of not.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,559
    Foxy said:

    Omnium said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
    Maybe the Greens could join in and all tie at 19%?

    It's quite nuts that a sensible party like the LDs are so held back by their leader that they can't make ground when all other parties are failing, and yet a 2nd bunch of the insane could come up on the rails.

    It’s not the leader.

    Lab and Con are on core vote. Reform is the anti-Lib Dems. The Greens are Spare Labour - Corbynites if you are lucky.

    Where are the Lib Dems going to get liberal democratic votes from?
    I am not sure there really exists a core vote for any party. Even @HYUFD, the only Tory in the PB village, is now flirting with Reform.

    LDs are the most transfer friendly of parties and can squeeze Labour, Green and One Nation Tories fairly readily, hence the formidable by-election machine, though can get similarly squeezed elsewhere. Further gains at the next GE are not easy, but not unlikely either. Voters know now who is the challenger in their seat.
    They know who's the challenger in their seat when Reform are on 14% - not when they're on 24%!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,624
    kamski said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    Ok. If this keeps happening - let me know and I'll give you a list of people to have little chats with your wife about.
    Can we have Vance, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Mike Johnson, Trump, Musk in that order please?
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,559
    ydoethur said:

    kamski said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    Ok. If this keeps happening - let me know and I'll give you a list of people to have little chats with your wife about.
    Can we have Vance, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Mike Johnson, Trump, Musk in that order please?
    Biden and Trump not old enough for you, you want a president over the age of 90?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
    All doubts could have been avoided with better, punchier writing

    “Imagine. A government Liquor Control Board decides what alcoholic drinks you can buy! 🫣”

    Better. And no dispute over grammar
    Still ambiguous though. It's not clear whether the author is celebrating or lamenting the notion we are invited to imagine.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,217

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
    All doubts could have been avoided with better, punchier writing

    “Imagine. A government Liquor Control Board decides what alcoholic drinks you can buy! 🫣”

    Better. And no dispute over grammar
    That would have been clearer. As it was, one couldn't tell whether WilliamGlen meant to write 'deciding', or 'to decide', which would have altered the meaning. I presume he meant 'deciding', so that's why I wrote what I did.
    Who gives a toss? We knew what @williamglenn meant and we aren't school children.
    Who gives a toss about what any of us posts here? He can choose to give what I said consideration of not.
    But it is arrogant and you were taken down a peg or two a few months ago when you did this and were wrong. I mean why bother? It seems very childish unless there is a good pun in it.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920

    kjh said:

    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @l_stone
    #BREAKING: Ontario Premier Doug Ford announces starting Tuesday, the province is removing American products from LCBO shelves & also from its catalogue so restaurants and retailers can’t order or restock U.S. products. #onpoli

    https://x.com/l_stone/status/1886047979301167465

    @AllieRenison

    That’s the third province in Canada to announce such retaliation to Trump’s tariffs (and two of the three premiers are Conservatives)

    Imagine having a government Liquor Control Board decide what alcoholic drinks you can buy.
    Deciding.
    It's the subjunctive.
    It was ugly.
    All doubts could have been avoided with better, punchier writing

    “Imagine. A government Liquor Control Board decides what alcoholic drinks you can buy! 🫣”

    Better. And no dispute over grammar
    That would have been clearer. As it was, one couldn't tell whether WilliamGlen meant to write 'deciding', or 'to decide', which would have altered the meaning. I presume he meant 'deciding', so that's why I wrote what I did.
    Who gives a toss? We knew what @williamglenn meant and we aren't school children.
    Who gives a toss about what any of us posts here? He can choose to give what I said consideration of not.
    But you were wrong.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,624
    Driver said:

    ydoethur said:

    kamski said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    Ok. If this keeps happening - let me know and I'll give you a list of people to have little chats with your wife about.
    Can we have Vance, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Mike Johnson, Trump, Musk in that order please?
    Biden and Trump not old enough for you, you want a president over the age of 90?
    I think if Greene and Johnson both snuff it then control of the House passes to the Dems, although I could have miscounted.

    But even a 90 year old who could pass for sane would be an improvement on Trump and Vance.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,836
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Black Doves is very entertaining. Great script, some brilliant characters

    However a lot of it demands serious suspension of disbelief. Most unbelievable of all: the idea a humble Minister for Defence could live in a spectacular Georgian house in central-ish London

    I reviewed in a few weeks back: ‘absurd but entertaining’.
    It doesn’t make the mistake of taking itself at all seriously.
    Yes. It also carries it all off in high style and makes you care - a bit - about the characters even tho it is basically a cartoon

    Very enjoyable. Hope they do another series
    Clearly intended, but will depend on the ratings (which look OK).
    Apparently already underway. Season 2 due in 2026. Bit slow but 👍

    I liked how they made london look glamorous. We could do with a bit more of that

    London is a magical city - outside of November, January, February and early March - we need more image-makes to celebrate it
    Black Doves is still shitter than pyramids, and Keira Knightley is hopeless in it. The other characters have less depth than the cast of Whacky Races, except any sentient viewer cares a lot more about what happens to Penelope Pitstop than about any of these cartoon figures.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,960
    Another interesting example of the thesis that Badenoch really doesn't do the required reading.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/feb/02/labour-conservatives-badenoch-shambles-breach-of-corporate-rules
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 74,156
    MJW said:

    Another interesting example of the thesis that Badenoch really doesn't do the required reading.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/feb/02/labour-conservatives-badenoch-shambles-breach-of-corporate-rules

    I must have missed this.
    .. Badenoch has previously said she does not make gaffes, telling the Chopper’s Politics podcast last September: “I never have gaffes, or apologising for something that I said, [saying] ‘oh that’s not what I meant’, I never have to clarify, because I think very carefully about what I say….

    That’s either a pretty leaden joke, or just bonkers.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,624
    Nigelb said:

    MJW said:

    Another interesting example of the thesis that Badenoch really doesn't do the required reading.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/feb/02/labour-conservatives-badenoch-shambles-breach-of-corporate-rules

    I must have missed this.
    .. Badenoch has previously said she does not make gaffes, telling the Chopper’s Politics podcast last September: “I never have gaffes, or apologising for something that I said, [saying] ‘oh that’s not what I meant’, I never have to clarify, because I think very carefully about what I say….

    That’s either a pretty leaden joke, or just bonkers.
    The Norman Lamont vibe is strong with this one.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    An academic bloke who researched this sort of stuff fairly rigorously is the late Ian Stevenson, University of Virginia. His apparently robust data, much about reincarnation and also weird cognitions and precognitions like this one (this one is fairly mild by his standards, I think he would it put down as interesting coincidence) is bizarre and extraordinary. Personally i find his stuff uncomfortable because I would mostly prefer him to be wrong.
    Co-incidences are far more common than lay people think.

    "But there's a lab there in that very city!"

    🤔
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,836

    Foxy said:
    Although that could be used to make the opposite point that much of what is written about foreign countries is ignorant rubbish.
    More like: much of what is written about foreign countries is a touch exaggerated here and there but is mostly pretty accurate
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 393
    MJW said:

    Another interesting example of the thesis that Badenoch really doesn't do the required reading.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/feb/02/labour-conservatives-badenoch-shambles-breach-of-corporate-rules

    Badenoch has previously said she does not make gaffes, telling the Chopper’s Politics podcast last September: “I never have gaffes, or apologising for something that I said, [saying] ‘oh that’s not what I meant’, I never have to clarify, because I think very carefully about what I say.”


    The self-belief of Truss.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    kamski said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    Ok. If this keeps happening - let me know and I'll give you a list of people to have little chats with your wife about.
    Lol, yes.

    But we've done Trump and Musk a few times and nothing so far ...
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    biggles said:

    Sean_F said:

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Remainers before the vote: "This will be shit"

    Brexiteers before the vote" "This will be brilliant"

    Remainers now: "This is shit"

    Brexiteers now: "Waaaaaaaaaaaa. IT'S NOT OUR FAULT. Waaaaaaaaaaaa"

    I can genuinely say the only impact Brexit has had on my life is that I now have to get a stamp in my passport when I go to Europe. Something I actually quite like. Admittedly, it seems to have impacted you more than most though.
    Its had minimal impact on my life and where I work too. A couple of suppliers changed to FOB from DDP aside from that nothing much.

    The biggest impact I’ve seen is online forums, like this, with the odd diehard FBPE Brexit obsessive ranting about it endlessly. FBPE and Brexit are two terms I muted on twitter ad my experience there is all the better for it.
    I doubt it's had any impact upon Scott's life, either. People get worked up online about all sorts of things that don't impact upon them.
    Yes, the secret truth of Brexit is that very few people have noticed any real difference.

    This annoys some who were Brexiteers because it was not a cure all. It also annoys many who were Remainers because the world has not ended, so they keep looking for edge cases to get excited over.

    In reality the impact is a bit of irritation in export focused sectors who had got used to not having to think of EU sales as exports, and a tiny impact on GDP; but we are now so far into the counterfactual no one knows by how much. Certainly, looking at EU economic performance it’s hard to argue that continued membership would have seen us do any better.

    The continued tears are because those who know what the process of joining the EU would mean also know us doing so is now inconceivable.

    Wittering on about it is a waste of everyone’s time.
    It absorbed virtually all the political resource of the country for half a decade. That in itself is a huge cost. You'd expect big tangible benefits as a result. If the very best one can conclude is that the impact is no big deal either way the project can only be deemed a fail.
    That wasn't intrinsic to a Leave vote - an awful lot of the bandwidth was consumed battling the sore losers, led, of course, by Starmer.
    Yes. And the ERG nutters. But whatever, it was a 5 year shitshow.
    Sure. But the ERG nutters in the end got cast as sane - or, at least, democratic - as they were the only people arguing to implement the referendum result come what may.
    They blocked the exit deal their own PM had negotiated. They (and the DUP) are no less to blame for the prolonged chaos than the opposition parties and the handful of hard Con Remainers.
    Except that it should never have got to the point where they could have helped block the deal. There was always a natural majority for a soft Leave type deal, if only the Remainers hadn't been like the dog at the river,
    Etc etc. Most done to death debate ever. So let me just sum up and conclude. It was incumbent on the governing Conservative party to negotiate and conclude the best Brexit deal they could in a timely and efficient manner. They failed abjectly to do so.
    I disagree. They got the best deal they could when in the crucial years, a majority in parliament and the Speaker of the House of Commons and the judges of the supreme court were all trying as hard as they could to prevent any deal at all.
    We've moved on, Driver. I did the summary and conclusion.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,189
    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    An academic bloke who researched this sort of stuff fairly rigorously is the late Ian Stevenson, University of Virginia. His apparently robust data, much about reincarnation and also weird cognitions and precognitions like this one (this one is fairly mild by his standards, I think he would it put down as interesting coincidence) is bizarre and extraordinary. Personally i find his stuff uncomfortable because I would mostly prefer him to be wrong.
    I have had premonitions in dreams in the past, strange vivid dreams that come true a few days later. Mostly these have been personal matters to do with family. I wonder myself if there is something supernatural, or merely my subconscious assembling a story from pieces that my conscious has not.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,945
    kamski said:

    Foxy said:
    Although that could be used to make the opposite point that much of what is written about foreign countries is ignorant rubbish.
    More like: much of what is written about foreign countries is a touch exaggerated here and there but is mostly pretty accurate
    Much of what is written about anything is a touch exaggerated here and there, or has flaws in the factual details, but is mostly pretty accurate.

    If a story is about something you know about, you can recognise the bits they got wrong. That only partially detracts from the overall sense.

    (Caveat: this works for writing that is trying to describe rather than persuade. For all sorts of reasons, that is thinner on the ground than it used to be.)
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,439
    kinabalu said:

    algarkirk said:

    kinabalu said:

    Wildly off topic. My wife and I have these little chats sometimes and this morning the main subject of it was Tony Martin (the farmer). We'd never discussed him before to my recollection. He wasn't in the news and hadn't been for ages. Now it's announced he's died. Incredible. The sort of thing that makes you believe in forces beyond our ken.

    An academic bloke who researched this sort of stuff fairly rigorously is the late Ian Stevenson, University of Virginia. His apparently robust data, much about reincarnation and also weird cognitions and precognitions like this one (this one is fairly mild by his standards, I think he would it put down as interesting coincidence) is bizarre and extraordinary. Personally i find his stuff uncomfortable because I would mostly prefer him to be wrong.
    Co-incidences are far more common than lay people think.

    "But there's a lab there in that very city!"

    🤔
    Maybe also sometimes less common. I find it hard to believe, though I think it must be true, that it is highly unlikely that two identical hands from 52 cards have ever been dealt in the whole of history.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 6,619
    ydoethur said:

    Just seen the scorecard.

    What does Jos Buttler have to do to get the sack?

    Should have gone after the World Cup, at the latest.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,559
    MJW said:

    Another interesting example of the thesis that Badenoch really doesn't do the required reading.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/feb/02/labour-conservatives-badenoch-shambles-breach-of-corporate-rules

    Badenoch had updated her entry in the register of MPs’ interests to say she was in control of C&UCO Management Ltd, C&UCO Services Ltd, C&UCO Properties Ltd and the Conservative Party Foundation from 2 November onwards but this was not reflected on the official company register.

    Makes you wonder why it wasn't done at the same time as the other changes on 26th November (and who made those changes): https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/00464224/filing-history
  • DriverDriver Posts: 5,559
    edited February 2
    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    Driver said:

    kinabalu said:

    biggles said:

    Sean_F said:

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Remainers before the vote: "This will be shit"

    Brexiteers before the vote" "This will be brilliant"

    Remainers now: "This is shit"

    Brexiteers now: "Waaaaaaaaaaaa. IT'S NOT OUR FAULT. Waaaaaaaaaaaa"

    I can genuinely say the only impact Brexit has had on my life is that I now have to get a stamp in my passport when I go to Europe. Something I actually quite like. Admittedly, it seems to have impacted you more than most though.
    Its had minimal impact on my life and where I work too. A couple of suppliers changed to FOB from DDP aside from that nothing much.

    The biggest impact I’ve seen is online forums, like this, with the odd diehard FBPE Brexit obsessive ranting about it endlessly. FBPE and Brexit are two terms I muted on twitter ad my experience there is all the better for it.
    I doubt it's had any impact upon Scott's life, either. People get worked up online about all sorts of things that don't impact upon them.
    Yes, the secret truth of Brexit is that very few people have noticed any real difference.

    This annoys some who were Brexiteers because it was not a cure all. It also annoys many who were Remainers because the world has not ended, so they keep looking for edge cases to get excited over.

    In reality the impact is a bit of irritation in export focused sectors who had got used to not having to think of EU sales as exports, and a tiny impact on GDP; but we are now so far into the counterfactual no one knows by how much. Certainly, looking at EU economic performance it’s hard to argue that continued membership would have seen us do any better.

    The continued tears are because those who know what the process of joining the EU would mean also know us doing so is now inconceivable.

    Wittering on about it is a waste of everyone’s time.
    It absorbed virtually all the political resource of the country for half a decade. That in itself is a huge cost. You'd expect big tangible benefits as a result. If the very best one can conclude is that the impact is no big deal either way the project can only be deemed a fail.
    That wasn't intrinsic to a Leave vote - an awful lot of the bandwidth was consumed battling the sore losers, led, of course, by Starmer.
    Yes. And the ERG nutters. But whatever, it was a 5 year shitshow.
    Sure. But the ERG nutters in the end got cast as sane - or, at least, democratic - as they were the only people arguing to implement the referendum result come what may.
    They blocked the exit deal their own PM had negotiated. They (and the DUP) are no less to blame for the prolonged chaos than the opposition parties and the handful of hard Con Remainers.
    Except that it should never have got to the point where they could have helped block the deal. There was always a natural majority for a soft Leave type deal, if only the Remainers hadn't been like the dog at the river,
    Etc etc. Most done to death debate ever. So let me just sum up and conclude. It was incumbent on the governing Conservative party to negotiate and conclude the best Brexit deal they could in a timely and efficient manner. They failed abjectly to do so.
    I disagree. They got the best deal they could when in the crucial years, a majority in parliament and the Speaker of the House of Commons and the judges of the supreme court were all trying as hard as they could to prevent any deal at all.
    We've moved on, Driver. I did the summary and conclusion.
    You did a summary and conclusion, but it was complete BSlacking in the required accuracy.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,541
    Nigelb said:

    MJW said:

    Another interesting example of the thesis that Badenoch really doesn't do the required reading.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/feb/02/labour-conservatives-badenoch-shambles-breach-of-corporate-rules

    I must have missed this.
    .. Badenoch has previously said she does not make gaffes, telling the Chopper’s Politics podcast last September: “I never have gaffes, or apologising for something that I said, [saying] ‘oh that’s not what I meant’, I never have to clarify, because I think very carefully about what I say….

    That’s either a pretty leaden joke, or just bonkers.
    Looks like the Triple Lock really is on the chopping block then.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 53,598
    Interesting thread from an economist on how the Trump administration plans to reset the international financial system:

    https://x.com/rebeleconprof/status/1886065413592666590
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 43,920
    Eabhal said:

    Nigelb said:

    MJW said:

    Another interesting example of the thesis that Badenoch really doesn't do the required reading.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/feb/02/labour-conservatives-badenoch-shambles-breach-of-corporate-rules

    I must have missed this.
    .. Badenoch has previously said she does not make gaffes, telling the Chopper’s Politics podcast last September: “I never have gaffes, or apologising for something that I said, [saying] ‘oh that’s not what I meant’, I never have to clarify, because I think very carefully about what I say….

    That’s either a pretty leaden joke, or just bonkers.
    Looks like the Triple Lock really is on the chopping block then.
    And maternity leave.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,652
    Foxy said:

    Omnium said:

    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Nah, would be funnier to see them all drop a little and transfer to the LD and have them all on 22% each.
    Maybe the Greens could join in and all tie at 19%?

    It's quite nuts that a sensible party like the LDs are so held back by their leader that they can't make ground when all other parties are failing, and yet a 2nd bunch of the insane could come up on the rails.

    It’s not the leader.

    Lab and Con are on core vote. Reform is the anti-Lib Dems. The Greens are Spare Labour - Corbynites if you are lucky.

    Where are the Lib Dems going to get liberal democratic votes from?
    I am not sure there really exists a core vote for any party. Even @HYUFD, the only Tory in the PB village, is now flirting with Reform.

    LDs are the most transfer friendly of parties and can squeeze Labour, Green and One Nation Tories fairly readily, hence the formidable by-election machine, though can get similarly squeezed elsewhere. Further gains at the next GE are not easy, but not unlikely either. Voters know now who is the challenger in their seat.
    No I will be Tory until the party goes extinct. Only if it does would I go Reform, which it would likely merge with anyway or LD
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 125,652
    edited February 2
    Leon said:

    Westminster Voting Intention:

    LAB: 25% (-4)
    CON: 25% (-2)
    RFM: 24% (+4)
    LDM: 14% (+2)
    GRN: 8% (+1)
    SNP: 3% (=)

    Via @BMGResearch, 28-29 Jan.
    Changes w/ 26-27 Nov.

    Cmon Britain. We can do this. Get Reform to 40

    Gives Labour 253, Conservatives 189, Reform 83 and LDs 72 so likely Labour minority government with LD support

    https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=N&CON=25&LAB=25&LIB=14&Reform=24&Green=8&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTReform=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2024
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,987
    Great article @Foxy.

    It's not going to do much for my winter mood though.
This discussion has been closed.