Howdy, Stranger!

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

By-election betting – politicalbetting.com

1235

Comments

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461
    kamski said:

    maxh said:

    @Luckyguy1983 Parliament can simply pass primary legislation to instruct the courts on how to deal with these situations without taking away rights from everyone else. That is the point of Parliament and is literally their job. Taking a sledgehammer to a screw is not the answer to everything.

    For example, you could disapply convention rights to deportation proceedings. That sounds quite heavy handed and maybe it is but the whole point of Parliament is to debate these difficult subjects, not simply sweep away all of our other rights because the alternative is too hard.

    There is a deeper question here, which I'll admit that I don't have the knowledge to pursue, which is the concept of European 'rights' granted by the state, and the English concept of liberty, which is the right not to be interfered with at all unless you're committing a crime. We had a very highly evolved and layered constitution in the UK, that gave British people liberty. Taking away that liberty but tacking on some 'human rights' is broadly what I feel has happened to our constitution in recent decades, and I don't feel it's a positive development.
    A very interesting question.

    Liberty is such a slippery concept, though. I'm completely with you that one of the most important aims of the constitution is to prevent state interference in that which should be the purview of the individual, family, community etc. And this prevention needs constant watchfulness.

    But whose liberty? How does eg the weakening of union power (which is something I am guessing you would advocate) impact on the worker who lacks economic power and so is exploited through eg a zero hours contract?

    Are they not entitled to liberty as much as you or I? We have little choice but to operate within a capitalist system and within that system I find it very hard to justify defining liberty in just a negative way i.e. freedom from interference. Instead I think it also needs to be defined positively i.e. freedom to flourish by being protected from exploitation.
    It's an aside not an answer, but I think our proud habit of jaywalking in this country is one of the few remnants of English/British liberty. If it's safe to cross the road, we will ruddy well cross it.
    difficult to jaywalk in England, as it's usually legal for pedestrians to cross the road. except on motorways, which I don't recommend no matter how proud it makes you feel.
    Now I’m picturing some of those Freemen types proudly striding across a motorway - “Exercising our Rights under Magna Carta”….
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015
    Andy_JS said:

    "William Atkinson
    The Runcorn by-election will be Reform’s first real test, and it risks puncturing Farage’s bubble"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/02/24/coming-runcorn-by-election-reform-first-test/

    Eh, maybe. They are riding pretty high at the moment but it is the sort of by-election a government might defend - yes they are well down from the GE, but it also isn't like it's the Tories defending a 13 year government.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    edited February 24
    Foxy said:

    FF43 said:

    I would never have expected the United States of America to line up with North Korea to vote against essentially every liberal democracy

    This is not business as usual, despite claims on here that it is.


    Looks like the world's largest democracy abstained...
    Lots of the Commonwealth did too.
    Most of the non western world isn't that bothered about Ukraine, for them it is a regional war on another continent much like we might view an African conflict. As Trump's victory shows that also goes for many Americans. Hence we as Europeans must take the lead on our own security
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,482

    Then there was Lord Mansfield in Somerset v Stewart in 1772 who famously decided that slavery had no basis in English law.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart

    There is a great film about this. But regardless, there is nothing new about any of this.

    What was the film? A quick google on 'Somerset v Stewart dramatisation' has given me nothing.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    ohnotnow said:

    Then there was Lord Mansfield in Somerset v Stewart in 1772 who famously decided that slavery had no basis in English law.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart

    There is a great film about this. But regardless, there is nothing new about any of this.

    What was the film? A quick google on 'Somerset v Stewart dramatisation' has given me nothing.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belle_(2013_film)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015

    TimS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Every time lawyers block government policy it probably increases support for populists.

    Maybe, but the English common law and the British constitution generally has a long history and tradition of lawfare and judicial creativity.

    Parliament should legislate better, and go back and fix loopholes where lawyers find them. That is the way Parliament is intended to work, we are a parliamentary democracy after all, rather than a presidential democracy, and always have been.
    “Lawfare”: please let’s not let yet another culture war term from America come and fester in our own politics. That one is more toxic than most, because it implies the rule of law shouldn’t apply to big strong men who shout loudly.
    I think it’s use is for cases where the law is being stretched extended into topics it was not intended to cover. We see this a bit with concerns over the assisted dying bill. And people worry about giving the state more powers to snoop on citizens as the reasons it happens and who gets to do it will inevitably grow.
    You do realise that is the entire benefit of the English common law? The judge-created law that was the bedrock of the Britain that created an empire? The bedrock of the golden era many wish to go back to?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donoghue_v_Stevenson

    Almost the entire modern law of negligence was created by judges, not Parliament. Lawyers stretching the law is the English tradition.
    I love that case. For lawyers it is presumably a very well known story being fundamental to negligence, but I read it in a book called 'Is eating people wrong?' about impactful legal cases

    There is much to learn about life and law from the snail case. At the top of the list must be the almost-ridiculous and haphazard way in which the common law develops and grows. Reliance on the purely fortuitous series of events that occured to May Donoghue in Paisley seems such a strange way to achieve a just system of legal rules...we owe a debt of gratitude to the persistence not only of Walter Leechman but also to David Stevenson, both of whom refused to let pragmatic compromise get in the way of what they thought was important moral principle.


    Some important principles can get established when persistent people focus on things that really should not matter as much as they think, and so push through to conclusions which rarely get to a point of final outcome.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    edited February 24

    Sir Edward Coke, the Lord Chief Justice, in 1610 stated in a judgment (Bonham's Case):

    "the common law will control Acts of Parliament, and sometimes adjudge them to be utterly void; for when an Act of Parliament is against common right and reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be per- formed, the common law will control it and adjudge such Act to be void.”

    Fwor - how woke. Down with this modern lawfare and up the will of the people.

    King James wasn’t so hot on Coke
    Coke was pre civil war and Glorious Revolution before Parliament had even asserted its supremacy over the Crown
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,482
    Carnyx said:

    TimS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Every time lawyers block government policy it probably increases support for populists.

    Maybe, but the English common law and the British constitution generally has a long history and tradition of lawfare and judicial creativity.

    Parliament should legislate better, and go back and fix loopholes where lawyers find them. That is the way Parliament is intended to work, we are a parliamentary democracy after all, rather than a presidential democracy, and always have been.
    “Lawfare”: please let’s not let yet another culture war term from America come and fester in our own politics. That one is more toxic than most, because it implies the rule of law shouldn’t apply to big strong men who shout loudly.
    I think it’s use is for cases where the law is being stretched extended into topics it was not intended to cover. We see this a bit with concerns over the assisted dying bill. And people worry about giving the state more powers to snoop on citizens as the reasons it happens and who gets to do it will inevitably grow.
    You do realise that is the entire benefit of the English common law? The judge-created law that was the bedrock of the Britain that created an empire? The bedrock of the golden era many wish to go back to?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donoghue_v_Stevenson

    Almost the entire modern law of negligence was created by judges, not Parliament. Lawyers stretching the law is the English tradition.
    Err, it was a Scottish mollusc and more importanly a Scots law case ... does that actually make any difference? I've often wondered.
    It always comes down to who has the biggest mussels, in one way or another...
  • Carnyx said:

    viewcode said:


    Darren Grimes

    @darrengrimes_
    ·
    8h
    Back then we didn’t have much. Life was hard, work was dangerous and times were tough. But my God at least we had each other — the country was united. In my lifetime that has been thoroughly lost.

    https://x.com/darrengrimes_/status/1893989526697111668



    Utterly deluded nostalgia.

    Reform in a nutshell.

    Bless him and his little shiny forehead

    Getty Images caption
    Women during the miners strike, Fitzwilliam, Yorkshire, June 1984.
    UNITED KINGDOM - APRIL 17: Back-to-back housing in a Yorkshire mining village.
    https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/back-to-back-housing-in-a-yorkshire-mining-village-news-photo/90759519


    Possibly the most disunited post-war England had ever been, then or since.
    Mm. He may be thinking of the Falklands. But against that one can put the poll tax.
    He wasn't born for another ten years.

    He is a Blair Baby.

    A Major baby and a Blair schoolkid.

    Seems to have gone off the deep end in 2015 because of the lack of social mobility in the fashion industry.

    And upset about the homophobia he experienced growing up:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-32117736
  • kamski said:

    maxh said:

    @Luckyguy1983 Parliament can simply pass primary legislation to instruct the courts on how to deal with these situations without taking away rights from everyone else. That is the point of Parliament and is literally their job. Taking a sledgehammer to a screw is not the answer to everything.

    For example, you could disapply convention rights to deportation proceedings. That sounds quite heavy handed and maybe it is but the whole point of Parliament is to debate these difficult subjects, not simply sweep away all of our other rights because the alternative is too hard.

    There is a deeper question here, which I'll admit that I don't have the knowledge to pursue, which is the concept of European 'rights' granted by the state, and the English concept of liberty, which is the right not to be interfered with at all unless you're committing a crime. We had a very highly evolved and layered constitution in the UK, that gave British people liberty. Taking away that liberty but tacking on some 'human rights' is broadly what I feel has happened to our constitution in recent decades, and I don't feel it's a positive development.
    A very interesting question.

    Liberty is such a slippery concept, though. I'm completely with you that one of the most important aims of the constitution is to prevent state interference in that which should be the purview of the individual, family, community etc. And this prevention needs constant watchfulness.

    But whose liberty? How does eg the weakening of union power (which is something I am guessing you would advocate) impact on the worker who lacks economic power and so is exploited through eg a zero hours contract?

    Are they not entitled to liberty as much as you or I? We have little choice but to operate within a capitalist system and within that system I find it very hard to justify defining liberty in just a negative way i.e. freedom from interference. Instead I think it also needs to be defined positively i.e. freedom to flourish by being protected from exploitation.
    It's an aside not an answer, but I think our proud habit of jaywalking in this country is one of the few remnants of English/British liberty. If it's safe to cross the road, we will ruddy well cross it.
    difficult to jaywalk in England, as it's usually legal for pedestrians to cross the road. except on motorways, which I don't recommend no matter how proud it makes you feel.
    Now I’m picturing some of those Freemen types proudly striding across a motorway - “Exercising our Rights under Magna Carta”….
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cb5Ka9SqGM
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015
    Hang on, isn't he always saying how crap we are now and going in the wrong direction? I mean, I get he needs to criticise the government of the day, but the general impression I get from Reform is also that we need to accept out decline and to stop fooling ourselves about it (and paying too much to fool ourselves)

    Via Guido

    Speaking to Jordan Peterson at the ARC Conference, Farage blamed Reeves’ gloominess for low birth rates:

    “We need higher birth rates, but we’re not going to get higher birth rates in this country until we can get some sense of optimism. We need a complete 180 shift in attitudes…. I mean, God, doesn’t Rachel Reeves make you want to reach for the cry tissues. It’s all so miserable, it’s all so declinist. Frankly, the Conservatives have been no better. We need a change of attitude in Britain.”
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 4,482

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    Eabhal said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    You can only fight back if you have strength and at present Europe has never looked weaker and that is worrying

    Indeed Trump affirmed his so called reciprocal tariffs on Europe with Macron beside him

    A lot of hard thinking is needed across Europe and the ROW, but it really does look as if Trump is welcoming Putin back into the world through the lens of his business interests and not geo political stability with untold consequences

    We are in a very scary place and it is not going to become less scary anytime soon
    Merz actually looked strong with his win last night, certainly more so than Scholz has, as does Macron who rang rings around Trump at their interview today. Both focused on developing European military forces and continuing to fund Ukraine. Starmer is a wet blanket but then Trump just treats the UK as a pet now, his main rivals are the EU and China, his main allies Israel, Russia and Argentina.

    Trump's US is therefore heading for a tariff war with China as well as the EU, it might be able to win a trade war against one of the other top 3 global economies but both?
    I think Starmer has a big call to make. Whether, in the face of Trump's perfidy, to continue to try to be a "bridge" or try another approach.

    I can't help feeling that a tough, even bloody-minded, united stance by UK, France, Germany and Canada might be a better option. The Canadians hate him anyway. We now have a new more decisive German chancellor. Macron is no pushover and the French, anyhow, don't do fealty to the Americans. Escalate. Swagger. Face up to him. Trump is a bully - return the favour.
    Whatever he decides, Starmer will be trailing along behind Trump or Macron, Merz and even Trudeau or Carney.

    We are now largely also rans in the top tier of global politics
    Wtf is wrong with everyone. Canada, UK, Germany, France together can cause a heck of stink if we bother to.

    Russia got bogged down by Ukraine (lol) and the Americans have gone nuts. Let's assert some calm steely sobriety.
    I agree, explain which form or welfare that the UK, Germany, France and Canada should cut to fund this new found "steely sobriety" if you can't then it's all words.

    We can no longer pay for millions of people to sit at home and not work because they have self diagnosed "anxiety" and managed to convince a dimwitted assessor that they need PIP.
    Pensions.

    Next question please.
    Even cancelling the triple lock won't get us to 3% for defence, ending early retirement in the public sector and a 40% haircut on current and future DB pensions might though.
    As I mentioned last week, to double defence spending to around 4% of GDP would cost the UK about £45 billion. It is estimated that cancelling the triple lock would save around between £8 and £10 billion a year. Making working pensioners pay NI on their pay would make around £1.5 billion a year. So those two measures lone would get you about 25% of your additional defence spending.
    Increase the state pension age:

    60-65 +6 months
    50-59 +1 year
    40-49 +1.5 years
    under 40 +2 years

    Not an immediate cash flow benefit but a big future saving.

    Also end or reduce pension credits.
    Imagine how much we could save if we just killed everyone when they hit their late 50s. I've never read the original novel that Logans Run was based on. Maybe it was very heavy on actuaries, accountancy, pensions and the funereal services.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,663

    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,663
    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,672
    TimS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Every time lawyers block government policy it probably increases support for populists.

    Maybe, but the English common law and the British constitution generally has a long history and tradition of lawfare and judicial creativity.

    Parliament should legislate better, and go back and fix loopholes where lawyers find them. That is the way Parliament is intended to work, we are a parliamentary democracy after all, rather than a presidential democracy, and always have been.
    “Lawfare”: please let’s not let yet another culture war term from America come and fester in our own politics. That one is more toxic than most, because it implies the rule of law shouldn’t apply to big strong men who shout loudly.
    Lawfare isn't an Americanism, it refers to a class of people who think they know best but are unable to get elected so attempt to impose their will on the people without democratic consent. It's tightly related to technocratic rule.

  • Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
  • ohnotnow said:

    Then there was Lord Mansfield in Somerset v Stewart in 1772 who famously decided that slavery had no basis in English law.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart

    There is a great film about this. But regardless, there is nothing new about any of this.

    What was the film? A quick google on 'Somerset v Stewart dramatisation' has given me nothing.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belle_(2013_film)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    Someone is behind the times

    The United States of America stands with Democracies and opposes Dictatorships.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,988
    kle4 said:

    Hang on, isn't he always saying how crap we are now and going in the wrong direction? I mean, I get he needs to criticise the government of the day, but the general impression I get from Reform is also that we need to accept out decline and to stop fooling ourselves about it (and paying too much to fool ourselves)

    Via Guido

    Speaking to Jordan Peterson at the ARC Conference, Farage blamed Reeves’ gloominess for low birth rates:

    “We need higher birth rates, but we’re not going to get higher birth rates in this country until we can get some sense of optimism. We need a complete 180 shift in attitudes…. I mean, God, doesn’t Rachel Reeves make you want to reach for the cry tissues. It’s all so miserable, it’s all so declinist. Frankly, the Conservatives have been no better. We need a change of attitude in Britain.”

    Let loose the Musk Inseminator....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015
    MaxPB said:

    TimS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Every time lawyers block government policy it probably increases support for populists.

    Maybe, but the English common law and the British constitution generally has a long history and tradition of lawfare and judicial creativity.

    Parliament should legislate better, and go back and fix loopholes where lawyers find them. That is the way Parliament is intended to work, we are a parliamentary democracy after all, rather than a presidential democracy, and always have been.
    “Lawfare”: please let’s not let yet another culture war term from America come and fester in our own politics. That one is more toxic than most, because it implies the rule of law shouldn’t apply to big strong men who shout loudly.
    Lawfare isn't an Americanism, it refers to a class of people who think they know best but are unable to get elected so attempt to impose their will on the people without democratic consent. It's tightly related to technocratic rule.
    I think it's a term that would be easy to abuse to refer to any kind of legal challenge to a government decision, but all but the most extreme accept we should have some of that, it is another of those areas where people might quibble of the precise term but we kind of know what is meant - the politics by other means, intentional frustrating through the courts, that kind of thing. It's whether the line is presently in the right place on how easy that is in certain situations.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,015

    kle4 said:

    Hang on, isn't he always saying how crap we are now and going in the wrong direction? I mean, I get he needs to criticise the government of the day, but the general impression I get from Reform is also that we need to accept out decline and to stop fooling ourselves about it (and paying too much to fool ourselves)

    Via Guido

    Speaking to Jordan Peterson at the ARC Conference, Farage blamed Reeves’ gloominess for low birth rates:

    “We need higher birth rates, but we’re not going to get higher birth rates in this country until we can get some sense of optimism. We need a complete 180 shift in attitudes…. I mean, God, doesn’t Rachel Reeves make you want to reach for the cry tissues. It’s all so miserable, it’s all so declinist. Frankly, the Conservatives have been no better. We need a change of attitude in Britain.”

    Let loose the Musk Inseminator....
    Well, I'll never unsee that sentence.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    And this is the response to the Brian Fitpatrick tweet that Twitter wants me to see:


  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935


    Sam Stein
    @samstein
    ·
    16m
    HHS guidance on responding to Musk email says it's no longer mandatory. Oh, it also contains a 🚨 bullet point at the end

    "Assume that what you write will be read by malign foreign actors and tailor your response accordingly"

    https://x.com/samstein/status/1894148343581876283

    What about malign domestic actors......
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,663
    Beyond words.



    Benny Johnson

    @bennyjohnson
    Wow. Dan Bongino just opened his show with a heartfelt message following his appointment as Deputy Director of the FBI.

    He is the man for the job:

    “President Trump, AG Bondi, and FBI Director Patel offered this role. I'm going to accept the role proudly. I love you guys.”

    https://x.com/bennyjohnson/status/1894061634064146463



    Tim Miller
    @Timodc
    ·
    21h
    what in the living fuck
  • kle4 said:

    Hang on, isn't he always saying how crap we are now and going in the wrong direction? I mean, I get he needs to criticise the government of the day, but the general impression I get from Reform is also that we need to accept out decline and to stop fooling ourselves about it (and paying too much to fool ourselves)

    Via Guido

    Speaking to Jordan Peterson at the ARC Conference, Farage blamed Reeves’ gloominess for low birth rates:

    “We need higher birth rates, but we’re not going to get higher birth rates in this country until we can get some sense of optimism. We need a complete 180 shift in attitudes…. I mean, God, doesn’t Rachel Reeves make you want to reach for the cry tissues. It’s all so miserable, it’s all so declinist. Frankly, the Conservatives have been no better. We need a change of attitude in Britain.”

    Let loose the Musk Inseminator....
    "Ejaculate? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances!"
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835
    kle4 said:

    Hang on, isn't he always saying how crap we are now and going in the wrong direction? I mean, I get he needs to criticise the government of the day, but the general impression I get from Reform is also that we need to accept out decline and to stop fooling ourselves about it (and paying too much to fool ourselves)

    Via Guido

    Speaking to Jordan Peterson at the ARC Conference, Farage blamed Reeves’ gloominess for low birth rates:

    “We need higher birth rates, but we’re not going to get higher birth rates in this country until we can get some sense of optimism. We need a complete 180 shift in attitudes…. I mean, God, doesn’t Rachel Reeves make you want to reach for the cry tissues. It’s all so miserable, it’s all so declinist. Frankly, the Conservatives have been no better. We need a change of attitude in Britain.”

    It's amazing how that sense of inevitable decline has also hammered Chinese birth rates.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,663
    rcs1000 said:

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    And this is the response to the Brian Fitpatrick tweet that Twitter wants me to see:


    Projection.

    Everything the Trump 2.0 Cult says from the big orange faced fuck man down is projection.

  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,738
    edited February 24
    MaxPB said:

    Eabhal said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    You can only fight back if you have strength and at present Europe has never looked weaker and that is worrying

    Indeed Trump affirmed his so called reciprocal tariffs on Europe with Macron beside him

    A lot of hard thinking is needed across Europe and the ROW, but it really does look as if Trump is welcoming Putin back into the world through the lens of his business interests and not geo political stability with untold consequences

    We are in a very scary place and it is not going to become less scary anytime soon
    Merz actually looked strong with his win last night, certainly more so than Scholz has, as does Macron who rang rings around Trump at their interview today. Both focused on developing European military forces and continuing to fund Ukraine. Starmer is a wet blanket but then Trump just treats the UK as a pet now, his main rivals are the EU and China, his main allies Israel, Russia and Argentina.

    Trump's US is therefore heading for a tariff war with China as well as the EU, it might be able to win a trade war against one of the other top 3 global economies but both?
    I think Starmer has a big call to make. Whether, in the face of Trump's perfidy, to continue to try to be a "bridge" or try another approach.

    I can't help feeling that a tough, even bloody-minded, united stance by UK, France, Germany and Canada might be a better option. The Canadians hate him anyway. We now have a new more decisive German chancellor. Macron is no pushover and the French, anyhow, don't do fealty to the Americans. Escalate. Swagger. Face up to him. Trump is a bully - return the favour.
    Whatever he decides, Starmer will be trailing along behind Trump or Macron, Merz and even Trudeau or Carney.

    We are now largely also rans in the top tier of global politics
    Wtf is wrong with everyone. Canada, UK, Germany, France together can cause a heck of stink if we bother to.

    Russia got bogged down by Ukraine (lol) and the Americans have gone nuts. Let's assert some calm steely sobriety.
    I agree, explain which form or welfare that the UK, Germany, France and Canada should cut to fund this new found "steely sobriety" if you can't then it's all words.

    We can no longer pay for millions of people to sit at home and not work because they have self diagnosed "anxiety" and managed to convince a dimwitted assessor that they need PIP.
    Max, you might have missed my position that we don't actually need to increase spending. We have a medium sized stick but we don't use it, so what's the point in a big one? Alongside our allies, we actually have a caber to toss.

    Let's use what we have and provide a negotiation backstop to Ukraine - if they don't like the deal then from April it's the RAF over Kyiv, the Navy in the Black Sea and a battalion or two on the front line.

    Anyway, your solution doesn't get anywhere near enough, once you dig into the welfare stats properly. Our employments rates are actually pretty decent, with most people not working either early retired or students.

    If it does actually kick off in a major way, I remind you that the top rate of tax was over 90% during the war and into the 50s and 60s.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,632


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
    Yes. The reason the AfD is the official opposition has been the utter failure of Merkelism, in particular tge problems associated with massive immigration from the Middle East. And the reason we now have Trump is that the democrats offered a senile old man followed by a woman so oit of touch with the concerns of modern America she made Hillary Clinton look like Bill Clinton.
    The reason the far right is on the rise is the utter crapness and aloofness of Andy Burnham's wing of the political spectrum.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902
    Is this a good idea?

    "Germany’s election victor must ditch its debt rules—fast
    Friedrich Merz has weeks to shore up his country’s defences" (£)

    https://www.economist.com/leaders/2025/02/24/germanys-election-victor-must-ditch-its-debt-rules-fast
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,204
    Here's some encouraging news about Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick -- and the House Republican leadership: https://fitzpatrick.house.gov/2025/2/breaking-house-leadership-taps-fitzpatrick-to-chair-cia-subcommittee

    ("Czar" Putin would not approve of that choice.)
  • Cookie said:


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
    Yes. The reason the AfD is the official opposition has been the utter failure of Merkelism, in particular tge problems associated with massive immigration from the Middle East. And the reason we now have Trump is that the democrats offered a senile old man followed by a woman so oit of touch with the concerns of modern America she made Hillary Clinton look like Bill Clinton.
    The reason the far right is on the rise is the utter crapness and aloofness of Andy Burnham's wing of the political spectrum.
    When senators Manchin and Sinema gave up on the Dems that should have been a warning sign to them.

    Instead they were happy to wave the centrists goodbye.

  • Sam Stein
    @samstein
    ·
    16m
    HHS guidance on responding to Musk email says it's no longer mandatory. Oh, it also contains a 🚨 bullet point at the end

    "Assume that what you write will be read by malign foreign actors and tailor your response accordingly"

    https://x.com/samstein/status/1894148343581876283

    Musk has been publicly humiliated.

    I wonder how his next meeting with Kash Patel will go.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,663
    rcs1000 said:

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    @Leon talked of Bluesky being a liberal echo chamber. But looking at the responses to the Fitzpatrick tweet, I can't help feel that Twitter has become vehemently, and extraordinarily anti-Ukraine.

    All the Tweets that X wants to show me spew various lies, that Ukraine had CIA bioweapon labs (linked to Covid!), that Zelenskyy wasn't properly elected, that he cancelled elections twice, that the Russians were welcomed with open arms in Ukraine.

    If you didn't know the truth, and if you went to Twitter, you would genuinely think that Ukraine was Nazi Germany, and Russia were the allies.
    More projection. This time from @Leon

  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 64,663
    edited February 24


    Sam Stein
    @samstein
    ·
    16m
    HHS guidance on responding to Musk email says it's no longer mandatory. Oh, it also contains a 🚨 bullet point at the end

    "Assume that what you write will be read by malign foreign actors and tailor your response accordingly"

    https://x.com/samstein/status/1894148343581876283

    Musk has been publicly humiliated.

    I wonder how his next meeting with Kash Patel will go.
    One of the few hopes at the moment is that this clown nazi shitshow eats itself in a mafia-style family feud over whose love is greatest for the King.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,935
    edited February 24
    rcs1000 said:

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    @Leon talked of Bluesky being a liberal echo chamber. But looking at the responses to the Fitzpatrick tweet, I can't help feel that Twitter has become vehemently, and extraordinarily anti-Ukraine.

    All the Tweets that X wants to show me spew various lies, that Ukraine had CIA bioweapon labs (linked to Covid!), that Zelenskyy wasn't properly elected, that he cancelled elections twice, that the Russians were welcomed with open arms in Ukraine.

    If you didn't know the truth, and if you went to Twitter, you would genuinely think that Ukraine was Nazi Germany, and Russia were the allies.
    This is why the broligarchs are going to win. They control the truth. Each year a couple of percent will be converted to their reality, so sooner or later we shall end up with their puppets in power across Europe too.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,816
    Cookie said:


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
    Yes. The reason the AfD is the official opposition has been the utter failure of Merkelism, in particular tge problems associated with massive immigration from the Middle East. And the reason we now have Trump is that the democrats offered a senile old man followed by a woman so oit of touch with the concerns of modern America she made Hillary Clinton look like Bill Clinton.
    The reason the far right is on the rise is the utter crapness and aloofness of Andy Burnham's wing of the political spectrum.
    And yet Burnham himself seems to be able to connect with even Tory parts of GM.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902
    edited February 24


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    Warning signs of what exactly, and what does he imply needs to be done?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,816
    All is projection.
    Once you see that it's easier to understand.
    Once you extend that to your own opinions and prejudices, well. Then it becomes interesting.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,204
    On a lighter note, I see from Wikipedia that soon-to-be-chancellor Merz owns two airplanes. I await with interest Dura Ace's comments on his choices.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Merz#Personal_life
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,204
    TSE - If you are looking for a header, let me suggest you run a competition for the best political jokes, in various categories. Here's one I have been telling recently:

    A Russian gets drunk, and begins marching around the Kremlin, yelling, "Putin is a madman! Putin is a madman!"

    Naturally, he is arrested, given a quick trial, and a sentence of eleven years.

    Why eleven years? One year for insulting the glorious leader of Russia -- ten years for revealing a state secret.

    (For the record, I read a very similar joke about Khrushchev years and years ago.)
  • TresTres Posts: 2,753
    Cookie said:


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
    Yes. The reason the AfD is the official opposition has been the utter failure of Merkelism, in particular tge problems associated with massive immigration from the Middle East. And the reason we now have Trump is that the democrats offered a senile old man followed by a woman so oit of touch with the concerns of modern America she made Hillary Clinton look like Bill Clinton.
    The reason the far right is on the rise is the utter crapness and aloofness of Andy Burnham's wing of the political spectrum.
    always someone elses fault isn't it?
  • Tres said:

    Cookie said:


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
    Yes. The reason the AfD is the official opposition has been the utter failure of Merkelism, in particular tge problems associated with massive immigration from the Middle East. And the reason we now have Trump is that the democrats offered a senile old man followed by a woman so oit of touch with the concerns of modern America she made Hillary Clinton look like Bill Clinton.
    The reason the far right is on the rise is the utter crapness and aloofness of Andy Burnham's wing of the political spectrum.
    always someone elses fault isn't it?
    The Dems chose to live in their comfort zone and lose rather than deal with reality.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,996

    rcs1000 said:

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    @Leon talked of Bluesky being a liberal echo chamber. But looking at the responses to the Fitzpatrick tweet, I can't help feel that Twitter has become vehemently, and extraordinarily anti-Ukraine.

    All the Tweets that X wants to show me spew various lies, that Ukraine had CIA bioweapon labs (linked to Covid!), that Zelenskyy wasn't properly elected, that he cancelled elections twice, that the Russians were welcomed with open arms in Ukraine.

    If you didn't know the truth, and if you went to Twitter, you would genuinely think that Ukraine was Nazi Germany, and Russia were the allies.
    This is why the broligarchs are going to win. They control the truth. Each year a couple of percent will be converted to their reality, so sooner or later we shall end up with their puppets in power across Europe too.
    You say this, but what is BlueSky if not an early thermostatic reaction to what Twitter/X was becoming/has become under Musk? Which itself could be seen as one radicalised man's reaction to the idea - funneled into his feed -Twitter had become a liberal echo chamber.

    The young don't really use it, or Facebook. Those they do have their own issues with radicalisation in all directions (and the CCP) - but aren't as obviously pro-Trump/broligarch. Both's current big advantage are their pre-existing institutional status. Twitter because it was every media and major organisation's comms channel, Facebook as it has all your photos and address book. But those erode over time as young people don't bother or people leave/use it less.

    Broadsheet journalists are already tending to shift towards Bluesky for the simple reason their links aren't suppressed and thus get much more clickthroughs on a comparably smaller amount of followers than on X. It's also simply not used in the same way for newsgathering now as isn't as basically reliable.

    There are obvious alternatives if push comes to shove - and likely will be more if you consider BlueSky has basically been spun out from anti-Musk Twitter employees. Who's to say the next big platform specifically sells itself as the anti-X or Facebook, either via data protection or safety measures, or rebelliously skewing in another direction? It's what you might be working on if Zuckerberg or Musk had just laid you off.

    Truth is, the more the broligarchs skew their platforms in favour of misinformation and their desires the more they will create an appetite for the alternatives. It won't happen immediately of course. Not quick enough for Ukraine. But every action creates a reaction and you will see a rebellion against it, just because it's more fun than being spoonfed bullshit.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,632
    dixiedean said:

    Cookie said:


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
    Yes. The reason the AfD is the official opposition has been the utter failure of Merkelism, in particular tge problems associated with massive immigration from the Middle East. And the reason we now have Trump is that the democrats offered a senile old man followed by a woman so oit of touch with the concerns of modern America she made Hillary Clinton look like Bill Clinton.
    The reason the far right is on the rise is the utter crapness and aloofness of Andy Burnham's wing of the political spectrum.
    And yet Burnham himself seems to be able to connect with even Tory parts of GM.
    He does. I said his wing of the political spectrum, rather than him specifically.
    Not least because he understands why Labour's vote is bleeding away in llaces like Rochfale and Leigh, and doesn't always take the obvious Labour-Party-2025 position.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,234
    edited February 25
    Cookie said:


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
    Yes. The reason the AfD is the official opposition has been the utter failure of Merkelism, in particular tge problems associated with massive immigration from the Middle East. And the reason we now have Trump is that the democrats offered a senile old man followed by a woman so oit of touch with the concerns of modern America she made Hillary Clinton look like Bill Clinton.
    The reason the far right is on the rise is the utter crapness and aloofness of Andy Burnham's wing of the political spectrum.
    Merz won though as he shifted the CDU right on immigration in large part.

    Non woke Biden of course beat Trump, woke Harris didn't. Burnham won the Greater Manchester Mayoralty by a big margin, winning lots of white working class votes in the process
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,632
    Tres said:

    Cookie said:


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
    Yes. The reason the AfD is the official opposition has been the utter failure of Merkelism, in particular tge problems associated with massive immigration from the Middle East. And the reason we now have Trump is that the democrats offered a senile old man followed by a woman so oit of touch with the concerns of modern America she made Hillary Clinton look like Bill Clinton.
    The reason the far right is on the rise is the utter crapness and aloofness of Andy Burnham's wing of the political spectrum.
    always someone elses fault isn't it?
    Do I blame the Dems for Trump? Absolutely I do. So totally avoidable.
    Blaming Trump for Trump is daft. He wanted to win, and got what he wanted.
    And similarly I blame Merkelism for the AfD, and 20 years of unpopular pro-immigration policies in the UK for Reform.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 1,996
    Cookie said:

    dixiedean said:

    Cookie said:


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    So is he now advocating welfarism, wokery and immigration be controlled ?
    Yes. The reason the AfD is the official opposition has been the utter failure of Merkelism, in particular tge problems associated with massive immigration from the Middle East. And the reason we now have Trump is that the democrats offered a senile old man followed by a woman so oit of touch with the concerns of modern America she made Hillary Clinton look like Bill Clinton.
    The reason the far right is on the rise is the utter crapness and aloofness of Andy Burnham's wing of the political spectrum.
    And yet Burnham himself seems to be able to connect with even Tory parts of GM.
    He does. I said his wing of the political spectrum, rather than him specifically.
    Not least because he understands why Labour's vote is bleeding away in llaces like Rochfale and Leigh, and doesn't always take the obvious Labour-Party-2025 position.
    That's partly the benefits of being a mayor though? The Labour/government position has to balance all kinds of competing factors. They might balance them well or badly, but whatever way, they can't be attuned to the needs and desires of voters in GM in the same way.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,632
    rcs1000 said:

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    @Leon talked of Bluesky being a liberal echo chamber. But looking at the responses to the Fitzpatrick tweet, I can't help feel that Twitter has become vehemently, and extraordinarily anti-Ukraine.

    All the Tweets that X wants to show me spew various lies, that Ukraine had CIA bioweapon labs (linked to Covid!), that Zelenskyy wasn't properly elected, that he cancelled elections twice, that the Russians were welcomed with open arms in Ukraine.

    If you didn't know the truth, and if you went to Twitter, you would genuinely think that Ukraine was Nazi Germany, and Russia were the allies.
    Twitter has gone from a sewer to a cesspit. Bluesky may be a liberal echo chamber, but frankly that looks far less horrific.
    I yield to almost noone on here in my despisal of woke. But Twitter is actually considerably worse than woke.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902
    Reconvening the outgoing parliament? I didn't know that was an option.

    "German election winner Friedrich Merz is exploring ways to loosen the country’s strict borrowing cap by reconvening the outgoing parliament where mainstream parties still hold a supermajority.
    Speaking to journalists on Monday, the leader of the centre-right Christian Democratic Union said he regretted that far right and far left parties secured more than a third of the seats in the Bundestag, giving them the power to block any constitutional changes, including to the so-called debt brake." (£)

    https://www.ft.com/content/33b4fcfd-803f-4b39-9778-6126196736c8
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461

    TSE - If you are looking for a header, let me suggest you run a competition for the best political jokes, in various categories. Here's one I have been telling recently:

    A Russian gets drunk, and begins marching around the Kremlin, yelling, "Putin is a madman! Putin is a madman!"

    Naturally, he is arrested, given a quick trial, and a sentence of eleven years.

    Why eleven years? One year for insulting the glorious leader of Russia -- ten years for revealing a state secret.

    (For the record, I read a very similar joke about Khrushchev years and years ago.)

    They’ve been telling that joke since Stalin died. At least.

    Why do KGB dog teams always have 2 men for each dog?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902
    edited February 25
    Something we can all agree on, hopefully. 😊

    "Westminster’s WhatsApp addiction must end
    Without accurate records, our politics is becoming less transparent – and less accountable."

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2025/02/westminsters-whatsapp-addiction-must-end
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,080
    @annmarie

    Federal workers who don’t respond to a DOGE-directed email “a second time” would be fired, Elon Musk says

    https://x.com/annmarie/status/1894186385495502889
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 33,902
    Scott_xP said:

    @annmarie

    Federal workers who don’t respond to a DOGE-directed email “a second time” would be fired, Elon Musk says

    https://x.com/annmarie/status/1894186385495502889

    Is Musk going to be doing this for the next 4 years?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,080
    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @annmarie

    Federal workers who don’t respond to a DOGE-directed email “a second time” would be fired, Elon Musk says

    https://x.com/annmarie/status/1894186385495502889

    Is Musk going to be doing this for the next 4 years?
    It can't last 4 years. The components are too unstable.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835
    Scott_xP said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @annmarie

    Federal workers who don’t respond to a DOGE-directed email “a second time” would be fired, Elon Musk says

    https://x.com/annmarie/status/1894186385495502889

    Is Musk going to be doing this for the next 4 years?
    It can't last 4 years. The components are too unstable.
    You say that, but I can't see Musk casting Trump aside just yet.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835
    Andy_JS said:

    Something we can all agree on, hopefully. 😊

    "Westminster’s WhatsApp addiction must end
    Without accurate records, our politics is becoming less transparent – and less accountable."

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2025/02/westminsters-whatsapp-addiction-must-end

    Sadly, that is the opposite of the away the world is going.

    And nowhere is that more obvious than in the US right now.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 6,155


    Andy Burnham
    @AndyBurnhamGM
    ·
    44m
    The far right becoming the official opposition in Germany and the US siding with North Korea at the UN.

    If the warning signs weren’t clear enough, then surely they must be now?

    The AfD were already the official opposition after the 2017 election.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 550
    edited February 25
    a
    kle4 said:

    TimS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Every time lawyers block government policy it probably increases support for populists.

    Maybe, but the English common law and the British constitution generally has a long history and tradition of lawfare and judicial creativity.

    Parliament should legislate better, and go back and fix loopholes where lawyers find them. That is the way Parliament is intended to work, we are a parliamentary democracy after all, rather than a presidential democracy, and always have been.
    “Lawfare”: please let’s not let yet another culture war term from America come and fester in our own politics. That one is more toxic than most, because it implies the rule of law shouldn’t apply to big strong men who shout loudly.
    I think it’s use is for cases where the law is being stretched extended into topics it was not intended to cover. We see this a bit with concerns over the assisted dying bill. And people worry about giving the state more powers to snoop on citizens as the reasons it happens and who gets to do it will inevitably grow.
    You do realise that is the entire benefit of the English common law? The judge-created law that was the bedrock of the Britain that created an empire? The bedrock of the golden era many wish to go back to?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donoghue_v_Stevenson

    Almost the entire modern law of negligence was created by judges, not Parliament. Lawyers stretching the law is the English tradition.
    I love that case. For lawyers it is presumably a very well known story being fundamental to negligence, but I read it in a book called 'Is eating people wrong?' about impactful legal cases

    There is much to learn about life and law from the snail case. At the top of the list must be the almost-ridiculous and haphazard way in which the common law develops and grows. Reliance on the purely fortuitous series of events that occured to May Donoghue in Paisley seems such a strange way to achieve a just system of legal rules...we owe a debt of gratitude to the persistence not only of Walter Leechman but also to David Stevenson, both of whom refused to let pragmatic compromise get in the way of what they thought was important moral principle.


    Some important principles can get established when persistent people focus on things that really should not matter as much as they think, and so push through to conclusions which rarely get to a point of final outcome.
    We should send a copy of the Declaration of Arbroath to Zelensky so he can forward it to Trump.

    On the European front, by 1320 Scottish relations with the papacy were in crisis after the Scots defied papal efforts to establish a truce with England. When the pope excommunicated Robert I and three of his barons, the Scots sent the Declaration of Arbroath as part of a diplomatic counter-offensive. The pope wrote to Edward II urging him to make peace, but it was not until 1328 that Scotland's independence was acknowledged.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 6,155

    rcs1000 said:

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    @Leon talked of Bluesky being a liberal echo chamber. But looking at the responses to the Fitzpatrick tweet, I can't help feel that Twitter has become vehemently, and extraordinarily anti-Ukraine.

    All the Tweets that X wants to show me spew various lies, that Ukraine had CIA bioweapon labs (linked to Covid!), that Zelenskyy wasn't properly elected, that he cancelled elections twice, that the Russians were welcomed with open arms in Ukraine.

    If you didn't know the truth, and if you went to Twitter, you would genuinely think that Ukraine was Nazi Germany, and Russia were the allies.
    This is why the broligarchs are going to win. They control the truth. Each year a couple of percent will be converted to their reality, so sooner or later we shall end up with their puppets in power across Europe too.
    The latest Last Week Tonight with John Oliver is on Facebook factchecking
    https://youtu.be/nf7XHR3EVHo?si=o_e5KRQ0KyP-MGyo

    Makes the point that Zuckerberg complained recently that Biden administration put pressure on Facebook - but Facebook resisted it. Whereas they have totally caved to Trump.

    Does anyone still use Facebook?

    Boycott that shit too and don't let them use your data!

    At the end of the day these people spread lies because it makes them money.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,742
    Battlebus said:

    a

    kle4 said:

    TimS said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Every time lawyers block government policy it probably increases support for populists.

    Maybe, but the English common law and the British constitution generally has a long history and tradition of lawfare and judicial creativity.

    Parliament should legislate better, and go back and fix loopholes where lawyers find them. That is the way Parliament is intended to work, we are a parliamentary democracy after all, rather than a presidential democracy, and always have been.
    “Lawfare”: please let’s not let yet another culture war term from America come and fester in our own politics. That one is more toxic than most, because it implies the rule of law shouldn’t apply to big strong men who shout loudly.
    I think it’s use is for cases where the law is being stretched extended into topics it was not intended to cover. We see this a bit with concerns over the assisted dying bill. And people worry about giving the state more powers to snoop on citizens as the reasons it happens and who gets to do it will inevitably grow.
    You do realise that is the entire benefit of the English common law? The judge-created law that was the bedrock of the Britain that created an empire? The bedrock of the golden era many wish to go back to?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donoghue_v_Stevenson

    Almost the entire modern law of negligence was created by judges, not Parliament. Lawyers stretching the law is the English tradition.
    I love that case. For lawyers it is presumably a very well known story being fundamental to negligence, but I read it in a book called 'Is eating people wrong?' about impactful legal cases

    There is much to learn about life and law from the snail case. At the top of the list must be the almost-ridiculous and haphazard way in which the common law develops and grows. Reliance on the purely fortuitous series of events that occured to May Donoghue in Paisley seems such a strange way to achieve a just system of legal rules...we owe a debt of gratitude to the persistence not only of Walter Leechman but also to David Stevenson, both of whom refused to let pragmatic compromise get in the way of what they thought was important moral principle.


    Some important principles can get established when persistent people focus on things that really should not matter as much as they think, and so push through to conclusions which rarely get to a point of final outcome.
    We should send a copy of the Declaration of Arbroath to Zelensky so he can forward it to Trump.

    On the European front, by 1320 Scottish relations with the papacy were in crisis after the Scots defied papal efforts to establish a truce with England. When the pope excommunicated Robert I and three of his barons, the Scots sent the Declaration of Arbroath as part of a diplomatic counter-offensive. The pope wrote to Edward II urging him to make peace, but it was not until 1328 that Scotland's independence was acknowledged.
    Donaghue -v-Stevenson was not "haphazard" in the way you think. The lawyers involved had been looking for a similar case for some time to test the principle. In Scottish pleadings we have a test of what is called relevancy. That means, if we assume for the moment that everything you say is true, so what?

    I have looked at the pleadings of the case before as a part of training exercise. There were several issues that were somewhat skated over, such as whether the claimant actually bought the offending bottle instead of her friend and whether it was open. It was never even proven that there was actually a snail in the bottle at all. By modern standards it was not entirely clear what the shopkeeper had done wrong, having bought the bottle from an apparently reputable supplier. By the time the case was decided by the House of Lords the claimant was dead. Not, so far as I know, because of anything in the bottle.

    But the lawyers wanted to explore the idea of a general duty of reasonable care based upon the foreseeability of injury and argued the case (on both sides) on that basis.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 72,822
    Eabhal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Eabhal said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    You can only fight back if you have strength and at present Europe has never looked weaker and that is worrying

    Indeed Trump affirmed his so called reciprocal tariffs on Europe with Macron beside him

    A lot of hard thinking is needed across Europe and the ROW, but it really does look as if Trump is welcoming Putin back into the world through the lens of his business interests and not geo political stability with untold consequences

    We are in a very scary place and it is not going to become less scary anytime soon
    Merz actually looked strong with his win last night, certainly more so than Scholz has, as does Macron who rang rings around Trump at their interview today. Both focused on developing European military forces and continuing to fund Ukraine. Starmer is a wet blanket but then Trump just treats the UK as a pet now, his main rivals are the EU and China, his main allies Israel, Russia and Argentina.

    Trump's US is therefore heading for a tariff war with China as well as the EU, it might be able to win a trade war against one of the other top 3 global economies but both?
    I think Starmer has a big call to make. Whether, in the face of Trump's perfidy, to continue to try to be a "bridge" or try another approach.

    I can't help feeling that a tough, even bloody-minded, united stance by UK, France, Germany and Canada might be a better option. The Canadians hate him anyway. We now have a new more decisive German chancellor. Macron is no pushover and the French, anyhow, don't do fealty to the Americans. Escalate. Swagger. Face up to him. Trump is a bully - return the favour.
    Whatever he decides, Starmer will be trailing along behind Trump or Macron, Merz and even Trudeau or Carney.

    We are now largely also rans in the top tier of global politics
    Wtf is wrong with everyone. Canada, UK, Germany, France together can cause a heck of stink if we bother to.

    Russia got bogged down by Ukraine (lol) and the Americans have gone nuts. Let's assert some calm steely sobriety.
    I agree, explain which form or welfare that the UK, Germany, France and Canada should cut to fund this new found "steely sobriety" if you can't then it's all words.

    We can no longer pay for millions of people to sit at home and not work because they have self diagnosed "anxiety" and managed to convince a dimwitted assessor that they need PIP.
    Max, you might have missed my position that we don't actually need to increase spending. We have a medium sized stick but we don't use it, so what's the point in a big one? Alongside our allies, we actually have a caber to toss.

    Let's use what we have and provide a negotiation backstop to Ukraine - if they don't like the deal then from April it's the RAF over Kyiv, the Navy in the Black Sea and a battalion or two on the front line.

    Anyway, your solution doesn't get anywhere near enough, once you dig into the welfare stats properly. Our employments rates are actually pretty decent, with most people not working either early retired or students.

    If it does actually kick off in a major way, I remind you that the top rate of tax was over 90% during the war and into the 50s and 60s.
    AIUI that wouldn't be possible under the Montreux convention. Indeed, the Turks already refused passage for two minesweepers we had given to Ukraine.

    If five aircraft and what's left of the British army could help I suppose we could send them, but more likely they would be on duties behind the front to free up Ukrainian combat troops.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,756
    Average energy price to rise by 6.4% or £85 a year

    So much for Ed Miliband's green energy
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,897
    @DavidL thanks for the insight. However isn’t the point that English (and Scottish) lawyers and judges have always looked for test cases to explore and expand points of principle and that “legislation from the bench” is a normal part of our legal system, not just a modern invention?

    Ps I did PM you a while back about my next career move (in Scotland). I was wondering if you have any thoughts, if you have time.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,298
    Two minute cartoon video on trump's amazing supergood offer to Ukraine.

    https://x.com/rshereme/status/1893725294227316794
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,483
    ydoethur said:

    Eabhal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Eabhal said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    You can only fight back if you have strength and at present Europe has never looked weaker and that is worrying

    Indeed Trump affirmed his so called reciprocal tariffs on Europe with Macron beside him

    A lot of hard thinking is needed across Europe and the ROW, but it really does look as if Trump is welcoming Putin back into the world through the lens of his business interests and not geo political stability with untold consequences

    We are in a very scary place and it is not going to become less scary anytime soon
    Merz actually looked strong with his win last night, certainly more so than Scholz has, as does Macron who rang rings around Trump at their interview today. Both focused on developing European military forces and continuing to fund Ukraine. Starmer is a wet blanket but then Trump just treats the UK as a pet now, his main rivals are the EU and China, his main allies Israel, Russia and Argentina.

    Trump's US is therefore heading for a tariff war with China as well as the EU, it might be able to win a trade war against one of the other top 3 global economies but both?
    I think Starmer has a big call to make. Whether, in the face of Trump's perfidy, to continue to try to be a "bridge" or try another approach.

    I can't help feeling that a tough, even bloody-minded, united stance by UK, France, Germany and Canada might be a better option. The Canadians hate him anyway. We now have a new more decisive German chancellor. Macron is no pushover and the French, anyhow, don't do fealty to the Americans. Escalate. Swagger. Face up to him. Trump is a bully - return the favour.
    Whatever he decides, Starmer will be trailing along behind Trump or Macron, Merz and even Trudeau or Carney.

    We are now largely also rans in the top tier of global politics
    Wtf is wrong with everyone. Canada, UK, Germany, France together can cause a heck of stink if we bother to.

    Russia got bogged down by Ukraine (lol) and the Americans have gone nuts. Let's assert some calm steely sobriety.
    I agree, explain which form or welfare that the UK, Germany, France and Canada should cut to fund this new found "steely sobriety" if you can't then it's all words.

    We can no longer pay for millions of people to sit at home and not work because they have self diagnosed "anxiety" and managed to convince a dimwitted assessor that they need PIP.
    Max, you might have missed my position that we don't actually need to increase spending. We have a medium sized stick but we don't use it, so what's the point in a big one? Alongside our allies, we actually have a caber to toss.

    Let's use what we have and provide a negotiation backstop to Ukraine - if they don't like the deal then from April it's the RAF over Kyiv, the Navy in the Black Sea and a battalion or two on the front line.

    Anyway, your solution doesn't get anywhere near enough, once you dig into the welfare stats properly. Our employments rates are actually pretty decent, with most people not working either early retired or students.

    If it does actually kick off in a major way, I remind you that the top rate of tax was over 90% during the war and into the 50s and 60s.
    AIUI that wouldn't be possible under the Montreux convention. Indeed, the Turks already refused passage for two minesweepers we had given to Ukraine.

    If five aircraft and what's left of the British army could help I suppose we could send them, but more likely they would be on duties behind the front to free up Ukrainian combat troops.
    Did we manage to get the minesweepers to Ukraine? (I think there is a possible route via rivers)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,406

    ydoethur said:

    Eabhal said:

    MaxPB said:

    Eabhal said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    TimS said:

    James Matthews of Sky reporting on Trump Macron meeting says it is all about change, radical change, change that is happening too quickly for Macron inside that meeting and Starmer when he comes here on Thursday, Europe and the world more broadly

    Matthews addresses the reality that so many are really struggling to comprehend

    When faced with rapid change that is bad - and Trump pulling support from Ukraine, threatening to annex Greenland and Panama and throwing around the threat of blanket tariffs are indeed bad - you can either go with it, or you can resist and fight back. Or you stand like a rabbit in the headlights.

    Quite a lot of people seem to think that the only option is to get with the programme. If they don’t, they are either in denial or have TDS. No. Standing like a rabbit in the headlights isn’t a good idea, but fighting back absolutely is.
    You can only fight back if you have strength and at present Europe has never looked weaker and that is worrying

    Indeed Trump affirmed his so called reciprocal tariffs on Europe with Macron beside him

    A lot of hard thinking is needed across Europe and the ROW, but it really does look as if Trump is welcoming Putin back into the world through the lens of his business interests and not geo political stability with untold consequences

    We are in a very scary place and it is not going to become less scary anytime soon
    Merz actually looked strong with his win last night, certainly more so than Scholz has, as does Macron who rang rings around Trump at their interview today. Both focused on developing European military forces and continuing to fund Ukraine. Starmer is a wet blanket but then Trump just treats the UK as a pet now, his main rivals are the EU and China, his main allies Israel, Russia and Argentina.

    Trump's US is therefore heading for a tariff war with China as well as the EU, it might be able to win a trade war against one of the other top 3 global economies but both?
    I think Starmer has a big call to make. Whether, in the face of Trump's perfidy, to continue to try to be a "bridge" or try another approach.

    I can't help feeling that a tough, even bloody-minded, united stance by UK, France, Germany and Canada might be a better option. The Canadians hate him anyway. We now have a new more decisive German chancellor. Macron is no pushover and the French, anyhow, don't do fealty to the Americans. Escalate. Swagger. Face up to him. Trump is a bully - return the favour.
    Whatever he decides, Starmer will be trailing along behind Trump or Macron, Merz and even Trudeau or Carney.

    We are now largely also rans in the top tier of global politics
    Wtf is wrong with everyone. Canada, UK, Germany, France together can cause a heck of stink if we bother to.

    Russia got bogged down by Ukraine (lol) and the Americans have gone nuts. Let's assert some calm steely sobriety.
    I agree, explain which form or welfare that the UK, Germany, France and Canada should cut to fund this new found "steely sobriety" if you can't then it's all words.

    We can no longer pay for millions of people to sit at home and not work because they have self diagnosed "anxiety" and managed to convince a dimwitted assessor that they need PIP.
    Max, you might have missed my position that we don't actually need to increase spending. We have a medium sized stick but we don't use it, so what's the point in a big one? Alongside our allies, we actually have a caber to toss.

    Let's use what we have and provide a negotiation backstop to Ukraine - if they don't like the deal then from April it's the RAF over Kyiv, the Navy in the Black Sea and a battalion or two on the front line.

    Anyway, your solution doesn't get anywhere near enough, once you dig into the welfare stats properly. Our employments rates are actually pretty decent, with most people not working either early retired or students.

    If it does actually kick off in a major way, I remind you that the top rate of tax was over 90% during the war and into the 50s and 60s.
    AIUI that wouldn't be possible under the Montreux convention. Indeed, the Turks already refused passage for two minesweepers we had given to Ukraine.

    If five aircraft and what's left of the British army could help I suppose we could send them, but more likely they would be on duties behind the front to free up Ukrainian combat troops.
    Did we manage to get the minesweepers to Ukraine? (I think there is a possible route via rivers)
    No, I saw them in the Solent a few weeks back.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,406

    @DavidL thanks for the insight. However isn’t the point that English (and Scottish) lawyers and judges have always looked for test cases to explore and expand points of principle and that “legislation from the bench” is a normal part of our legal system, not just a modern invention?

    Ps I did PM you a while back about my next career move (in Scotland). I was wondering if you have any thoughts, if you have time.

    The important right of jury nulliffication originates with a Seventeenth century case.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 550
    Far more important news is that Trump is not happy with Boeing over Air Force One. Delayed and overbudget.

    Sneek preview of livery so he knows which bits are which.


  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,738

    Good morning, everyone.

    Average energy price to rise by 6.4% or £85 a year

    So much for Ed Miliband's green energy

    Wearing a hair shirt to prove your virtue has always been popular with the zealous. The modern approach of forcing others to wear the hair shirt so one can feel virtuous is rather less splendid.
    Scotland produces 113% of its electricity consumption through renewables yet we still pay prices linked to gas. Portugal manages 97% and has the lowest prices anywhere in Europe.

    It's a scandal, and why there is hope for the SNP yet.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,153

    On a lighter note, I see from Wikipedia that soon-to-be-chancellor Merz owns two airplanes. I await with interest Dura Ace's comments on his choices.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Merz#Personal_life

    I have no interest in nor knowledge of civil aviation. If you find out what car he has, I'll give you full Sturm und Drang on that.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835

    Average energy price to rise by 6.4% or £85 a year

    So much for Ed Miliband's green energy

    That's not *quite* true: it is the Ofgem price cap that is to rise by 6.4%.

  • TazTaz Posts: 16,907

    Average energy price to rise by 6.4% or £85 a year

    So much for Ed Miliband's green energy

    On the plus side we can get more shots of him in a field, strumming a guitar badly, singing "blowing in the wind".
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,756
    rcs1000 said:

    Average energy price to rise by 6.4% or £85 a year

    So much for Ed Miliband's green energy

    That's not *quite* true: it is the Ofgem price cap that is to rise by 6.4%.

    LOL explain that to a voter when they get their next bill
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 14,153


    Did we manage to get the minesweepers to Ukraine? (I think there is a possible route via rivers)

    Very tight on draught in the Rhine - Danube canal. Could be done... maybe... Generally, not worth the risk and arse on to get two clapped out plastic minehunters armed with a single 30mm into theatre.

    They are more use where they are, training Ukrainian foremast hands.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,328
    ohnotnow said:

    Then there was Lord Mansfield in Somerset v Stewart in 1772 who famously decided that slavery had no basis in English law.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart

    There is a great film about this. But regardless, there is nothing new about any of this.

    What was the film? A quick google on 'Somerset v Stewart dramatisation' has given me nothing.
    Belle
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835

    rcs1000 said:

    Average energy price to rise by 6.4% or £85 a year

    So much for Ed Miliband's green energy

    That's not *quite* true: it is the Ofgem price cap that is to rise by 6.4%.

    LOL explain that to a voter when they get their next bill
    I'm just trying to be factually accurate.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,328
    HYUFD said:

    Sir Edward Coke, the Lord Chief Justice, in 1610 stated in a judgment (Bonham's Case):

    "the common law will control Acts of Parliament, and sometimes adjudge them to be utterly void; for when an Act of Parliament is against common right and reason, or repugnant, or impossible to be per- formed, the common law will control it and adjudge such Act to be void.”

    Fwor - how woke. Down with this modern lawfare and up the will of the people.

    King James wasn’t so hot on Coke
    Coke was pre civil war and Glorious Revolution before Parliament had even asserted its supremacy over the Crown
    As was King James I & VI…
  • eekeek Posts: 29,397
    Battlebus said:

    Far more important news is that Trump is not happy with Boeing over Air Force One. Delayed and overbudget.

    Sneek preview of livery so he knows which bits are which.


    It's Boeing - WTF was he expecting...
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,756
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Average energy price to rise by 6.4% or £85 a year

    So much for Ed Miliband's green energy

    That's not *quite* true: it is the Ofgem price cap that is to rise by 6.4%.

    LOL explain that to a voter when they get their next bill
    I'm just trying to be factually accurate.
    What's that got to do with politics ?

  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461
    Battlebus said:

    Far more important news is that Trump is not happy with Boeing over Air Force One. Delayed and overbudget.

    Sneek preview of livery so he knows which bits are which.


    To be fair (yes, I know), the AF1 project is classic of the genre - cost plus contracts, a variety of the Usual Suspects as vendors, absurd capability greed, a specification that is quite possibly a life form at this point and incompetent management in all 27 sides of the project.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,975
    The way things are going at the moment it's looking like it's going to be Oceania v Eurasia v Eastasia...
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,328

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    I guess he’s a congressman so didn’t vote in the recent confirmations…
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835

    Battlebus said:

    Far more important news is that Trump is not happy with Boeing over Air Force One. Delayed and overbudget.

    Sneek preview of livery so he knows which bits are which.


    To be fair (yes, I know), the AF1 project is classic of the genre - cost plus contracts, a variety of the Usual Suspects as vendors, absurd capability greed, a specification that is quite possibly a life form at this point and incompetent management in all 27 sides of the project.
    You forgot: "specification drawn up so there is only one qualified bidder"
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835

    The way things are going at the moment it's looking like it's going to be Oceania v Eurasia v Eastasia...

    So you're saying I'm going to get a massive TV at home for free???
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,328
    rcs1000 said:

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    And this is the response to the Brian Fitpatrick tweet that Twitter wants me to see:


    Sheesh

  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,835

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    I guess he’s a congressman so didn’t vote in the recent confirmations…
    I read the comments underneath: it was possibly the most depressing thing I'd refer read.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,461
    Eabhal said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Average energy price to rise by 6.4% or £85 a year

    So much for Ed Miliband's green energy

    Wearing a hair shirt to prove your virtue has always been popular with the zealous. The modern approach of forcing others to wear the hair shirt so one can feel virtuous is rather less splendid.
    Scotland produces 113% of its electricity consumption through renewables yet we still pay prices linked to gas. Portugal manages 97% and has the lowest prices anywhere in Europe.

    It's a scandal, and why there is hope for the SNP yet.
    Which illustrates another problem of the Process State.

    The high prices were there to a) encourage renewables and b) encourage reduction in usage.

    This has become unthinking Holy Writ. If you suggest reducing ‘leccy prices, people in the system react in horror. That would go against The Policy.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,988

    Battlebus said:

    Far more important news is that Trump is not happy with Boeing over Air Force One. Delayed and overbudget.

    Sneek preview of livery so he knows which bits are which.


    To be fair (yes, I know), the AF1 project is classic of the genre - cost plus contracts, a variety of the Usual Suspects as vendors, absurd capability greed, a specification that is quite possibly a life form at this point and incompetent management in all 27 sides of the project.
    Would have been funny if they had highlighted "screws" by the windows...
  • NEW THREAD

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,197
    MJW said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    @Leon talked of Bluesky being a liberal echo chamber. But looking at the responses to the Fitzpatrick tweet, I can't help feel that Twitter has become vehemently, and extraordinarily anti-Ukraine.

    All the Tweets that X wants to show me spew various lies, that Ukraine had CIA bioweapon labs (linked to Covid!), that Zelenskyy wasn't properly elected, that he cancelled elections twice, that the Russians were welcomed with open arms in Ukraine.

    If you didn't know the truth, and if you went to Twitter, you would genuinely think that Ukraine was Nazi Germany, and Russia were the allies.
    This is why the broligarchs are going to win. They control the truth. Each year a couple of percent will be converted to their reality, so sooner or later we shall end up with their puppets in power across Europe too.
    You say this, but what is BlueSky if not an early thermostatic reaction to what Twitter/X was becoming/has become under Musk? Which itself could be seen as one radicalised man's reaction to the idea - funneled into his feed -Twitter had become a liberal echo chamber.

    The young don't really use it, or Facebook. Those they do have their own issues with radicalisation in all directions (and the CCP) - but aren't as obviously pro-Trump/broligarch. Both's current big advantage are their pre-existing institutional status. Twitter because it was every media and major organisation's comms channel, Facebook as it has all your photos and address book. But those erode over time as young people don't bother or people leave/use it less...
    They use TikTok, though.
    As have both AfD and Reform, with a significant degreee of success.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,328

    rcs1000 said:

    Bill Kristol
    @BillKristol
    ·
    6h
    Excellent from Republican member of the House.


    Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick 🇺🇸

    @RepBrianFitz
    ·
    10h
    Today, we unequivocally and unapologetically reaffirm, to the United States of America and to the World, the following undeniable and indisputable facts. We ask all Americans, including all elected officials from all Parties and all levels of Government, to join us by sharing and

    https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1894058421713809644

    @Leon talked of Bluesky being a liberal echo chamber. But looking at the responses to the Fitzpatrick tweet, I can't help feel that Twitter has become vehemently, and extraordinarily anti-Ukraine.

    All the Tweets that X wants to show me spew various lies, that Ukraine had CIA bioweapon labs (linked to Covid!), that Zelenskyy wasn't properly elected, that he cancelled elections twice, that the Russians were welcomed with open arms in Ukraine.

    If you didn't know the truth, and if you went to Twitter, you would genuinely think that Ukraine was Nazi Germany, and Russia were the allies.
    This is why the broligarchs are going to win. They control the truth. Each year a couple of percent will be converted to their reality, so sooner or later we shall end up with their puppets in power across Europe too.
    Which is why what you need to do is ban twitter. Trump will go apeshit of course but so be it.

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,871

    Battlebus said:

    Far more important news is that Trump is not happy with Boeing over Air Force One. Delayed and overbudget.

    Sneek preview of livery so he knows which bits are which.


    To be fair (yes, I know), the AF1 project is classic of the genre - cost plus contracts, a variety of the Usual Suspects as vendors, absurd capability greed, a specification that is quite possibly a life form at this point and incompetent management in all 27 sides of the project.
    Marine One replacement (VXX program) was an interesting one. Started in 2002; first operational flight 2024.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_One#VXX_program
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,197
    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @annmarie

    Federal workers who don’t respond to a DOGE-directed email “a second time” would be fired, Elon Musk says

    https://x.com/annmarie/status/1894186385495502889

    Is Musk going to be doing this for the next 4 years?
    It can't last 4 years. The components are too unstable.
    You say that, but I can't see Musk casting Trump aside just yet.
    Musk renews his ‘5 things’ demand with Trump’s apparent support
    “Failure to respond a second time will result in termination,” the billionaire warned.
    https://www.politico.com/news/2025/02/24/musk-5-things-demand-trump-support-00205876
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,197
    Nasty.
    Imagine seeing that in your rear view mirror.

    Dashcam footage shows deadly bridge collapse in South Korea
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/25/south-korea-bridge-collapse-anseong-video-footage
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 9,328

    TSE - If you are looking for a header, let me suggest you run a competition for the best political jokes, in various categories. Here's one I have been telling recently:

    A Russian gets drunk, and begins marching around the Kremlin, yelling, "Putin is a madman! Putin is a madman!"

    Naturally, he is arrested, given a quick trial, and a sentence of eleven years.

    Why eleven years? One year for insulting the glorious leader of Russia -- ten years for revealing a state secret.

    (For the record, I read a very similar joke about Khrushchev years and years ago.)

    On the nature of truth:

    Nixon and Khrushchev agreed to run a race around the Kremlin, which Nixon one.

    Pravda reported that Khrushchev was a close runner up, while Nixon was second to last.
This discussion has been closed.