Do you fancy a 2% return in a week? – politicalbetting.com
Do you fancy a 2% return in a week? – politicalbetting.com
If the answer is yes to the question in the headline then this Ladbrokes market is for you.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Going for the absence of mens rea defence ?
my goodness you can see Tulsi Gabbard trying to come up with evasive answers to Kelly's questions in real time
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1904560131934744652
1: At 12:06am
2: At 9:44am
https://x.com/AlexHortonTX/status/1904531479868129446
Kelly asked.
She answered
He basically said that’s not what I meant
She gave the same answer…
If you go to https://vf.politicalbetting.com/ and log on you should see a red notification telling you where to go
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GAlDyTMAZM
But the extremes of radicalisation through social media are only part of the story. I've just got out of a meeting between a Y11 boy and Mum - he is on course to fail GCSE maths and this is a last ditch attempt to get him to commit to actually revising when he says he will, rather than posting on Snapchat and watching Netflix.
We can all insert the usual caveats about feckless teenagers and overly permissive parents, and those caveats all hold in this case.
But how in holy hell have we got to the point where we think it is appropriate or sensible to put a highly addictive technology in the pockets of pre-frontal-cortex-deficient teenagers, where their attention is quite literally the product on offer to the most rapacious bidder, just at the point when their whole future success depends on them putting their attention into a fundamentally less immediately gratifying pursuit such as revising?
Why am I as a teacher being asked to compete with that? Why is this boy's mum being asked to get into constant conflict with him to ask him to overcome an addictive draw on his limited attention? In what possible world do we think this is in any way sensible?
Alright this boy isn't going to go and stab someone. But he is going to mess his life up. And we're greasing that slippery slope for him.
*Although I have some beef with episode 2 - the shambles of a school makes for good TV but is not representative.
But depending on the state of the Union in 2028, boring might be just the job.
If there is a Union in 2028 and it's still having competitive elections.
I presume I'll get my stake back if the whole election is cancelled because of martial law or whatever.
As one who feels in retrospect of 50 years maybe I worked far too hard at school I would really like to see some statistical analysis.
People.
On the last point, there were only 2 or 3 chaotic classes, and obviously the corridor clamour.
Not unusual I think. The head of lower school teacher seemed as pathetic as some senior teachers I've seen in the past. The Head teacher was just scared of his back. I would also say that the use of videos was the only way to calm down some classes.
Civilisation rests on a stiff upper lip
Mary Harrington"
https://unherd.com/2025/03/male-repression-is-good-actually/
So, he's not cutting Medicare, it's just no one can physical access it.
An independent KC has found “credible evidence” of unlawful harassment of two women by MP Rupert Lowe and “male members of his team”, Reform UK has said.
Jacqueline Perry KC, who was commissioned by Reform, said there was “veracity in the complaints from both women which amounts (to) ‘credible evidence’ — to use Mr Lowe’s own words”.
Perry said that the complaints of “victimisation, constant criticisms (and) discriminatory behaviour do seem to amount to harassment on the part of both Mr Lowe and his constituency team”.
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/former-reform-mp-rupert-lowe-failed-to-address-toxic-conduct-says-kc-h99pz8k8d
I've spent the afternoon wondering if the irony of comment will tear asunder fabric of the space time continuum
He is arguing that people thought Starmer was competent when he was just lacking charisma. While they were wrong, it’s an easy mistake to make.
However, this process against him is embarrassing. First reporting him to the police for hurty words, and now this sort of half-hearted smeary announcement that he is guilty of harrassment in a 'silence is violence' sort of way. The whole thing is extremely unedifying and frankly they deserve to lose Runcorn to give them a kick in the hoop.
Edit - On reflection I should have used 'mistake/for'.
Being dull also did wonders for 'Spreadsheet Phil' Hammond. The trouble is, like Brown, he was shite.
·
12m
It’s like Watergate, only in this version Nixon directly mails the tapes to Woodward and Bernstein
Makes me think he cannot sustain much opposition momentum from within the party, unless maybe they have a terrible locals?
And yet they still managed to elect a chaotic and mendacious TV personality.
Twice.
Well, Howard, your mother is atypical. There are tens of millions of voters for whom Social Security is their primary source of income. And if they don't get their check they don't eat.
These older, lower education, lower income pensioners voted for Donald Trump.
Reality distortion only goes so far. It's hard to think of a policy better designed to fuck over your own voters than not sending them their Social Security cheques because Elon Musk is convinced the program is rife with fraud. (It's not.)
@olliecarroll
Feels like a bit of a mugging. The talks were trailed as technical, agreeing no-strike list of infrastructure targets. In the end, seasoned Russian negotiators spent 12 hours wearing the Americans down. Sanctions relief the minimum. Who knows what else was agreed.
https://x.com/olliecarroll/status/1904594219601191227
Yaroslav Trofimov
@yarotrof
·
1h
So basically Russia gets sanctions relief under the Black Sea ceasefire deal negotiated by the Trump administration, and Ukraine gets the status quo or worse.
https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1904571378092646772
That's not to say anyone can discount an 'independent' person knowing what their brief really is, but who else should have done such an investigation and who would appoint them in this instance?
Perhaps it's a useful insight into how some people's minds work. But I think I'd want more evidence that the workings of many people's minds are that confused.
https://x.com/markjcarney/status/190451706683031563
If it’s built by Canadian workers on Canadian docks, it should be made with Canadian steel and aluminum.
Great.
"So why has it taken so long just to get planning permission for this project? The reason is that colossal amounts of time and money have been spent building a mountain of paperwork. All told, National Highways has been forced to produce 359,866 pages to get approval from the crossing. Laid end to end, this paper trail would stretch 66 miles, almost five times longer than the road itself. There’s 1,800 pages on newts, 774 pages on bats, 5,800 pages on archaeology, and a long running debate National Highways had with a Cambridge college about nitrogen deposition." (£)
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-lower-thames-crossing-and-the-failure-of-the-british-state/
Of course there's now a risk this will go to your head and you'll start showing off. So we'll leave it there.
If it turns out badly, the people who might be complaining won't be in a position to complain...
That doesn't mean she can't act for a client, and present their case as well as she can, but her client here would be RefUK, and the terms of reference would have been agreed with Lowe when he was in the party.
If Lowe thinks she hasn't been independent, and has reached conclusions an impartial barrister could not properly have reached (in the interests of Farage or anyone else) that's a complaint to the Bar Council - and quite a serious one.
I think this is why he is being relatively measured here. There pretty clearly is credible evidence against him here. He can (and I assume does) argue that the evidence has been manipulated by his enemies - that his accusers are exaggerating or lying in a systematic way that has resulted in the KC being misled. But it's very hard to make the KC part of the "conspiracy" herself - perhaps he will complain to the Bar Council, but it's actually very unlikely a KC would jeopardise her reputation and indeed career to do a personal favour to Farage. She was paid her rate to assess the evidence, and did so.
That said I can't summon up the energy to ask what's really going on.
A perfectly normal day here.
At least, I hope the tattoo's temporary...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhLJ-LU9Abs
Whether such a thing is possible is a different question, best not looked into too closely, like how juries reach their decisions. All societies need foundational myths and these two are an improvemnet on trial by ordeal.
There could be a grand conspiracy, but it's pretty unlikely. Lowe's best approach is probably to shake his head sadly and say the KC tragically had the wool pulled over her eyes by dreadful liars and crooks. People who don't like Farage may well buy that. But saying she was part of the plot probably isn't a runner.