After the obsession in the media with the fact Andrew slept with a 17 year old, stupidly but legally in the UK given age of consent is 16 and over the fact he paid £8 million for the Royal Lodge lease and refurbishments for a, again legal, peppercorn rent little surprise.
However, still a comfortable 18% lead for monarchy over republic even in the new MiC poll. A massive 66% of Tories for retaining the monarchy and a large 65% of Reform voters for retaining the monarchy as well. A significant 18% lead for retaining the monarchy amongst LD voters and a small 10% lead for the monarchy amongst Labour voters as well.
Clearly more Green voters want a republic than to keep the monarchy but given if Polansi won a majority he would whack up tax and nationalise so much industry and suck up to Hamas harder than Corbyn so we would be a near Marxist state that would be the least of our worries.
What is going on with people on here over the past few days trying to miminize disgusting behaviour. The obsession isn't JUST he did this, it is that a senior member of the royal was best buds with a profilic sex trafficer, continued that friendships for years after being convicted, let said individual into the heart of royal family with invites to parties for their kids, and then has lied repeatedly about it.
The obsession is from republicans, maybe including you, when there is no evidence Andrew did anything illegal no matter how stupid and when you largely ignore the likes of Trump, Clinton, Bill Gates, Kevin Spacey, Mandelson etc who were also in Epstein's orbit
Quite.
I think HY misses the point. I am (very gently) a monarchist, for the reasons OLB wrote upthread. But I can also see that our Royal Family, if they are to play any sensible function in modern society, should be held to a higher moral standard than politicians or actors. The late Queen did this very well and, notwithstanding his complicated relationships with Diana and Camilla, so does Charles imv. Thus when a fairly senior Royal is found to be in Epstein's world, I think it rightly gets more focus than a list of Americans or a politician who is known already to be pretty odious.
Not just any old Americans, TWO US Presidents were in those in Epstein's world, they are/were actual US heads of state and government, Andrew isn't even in top 5 in line of accession now
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
After the obsession in the media with the fact Andrew slept with a 17 year old, stupidly but legally in the UK given age of consent is 16 and over the fact he paid £8 million for the Royal Lodge lease and refurbishments for a, again legal, peppercorn rent little surprise.
However, still a comfortable 18% lead for monarchy over republic even in the new MiC poll. A massive 66% of Tories for retaining the monarchy and a large 65% of Reform voters for retaining the monarchy as well. A significant 18% lead for retaining the monarchy amongst LD voters and a small 10% lead for the monarchy amongst Labour voters as well.
Clearly more Green voters want a republic than to keep the monarchy but given if Polansi won a majority he would whack up tax and nationalise so much industry and suck up to Hamas harder than Corbyn so we would be a near Marxist state that would be the least of our worries.
What is going on with people on here over the past few days trying to miminize disgusting behaviour. The obsession isn't JUST he did this, it is that a senior member of the royal was best buds with a profilic sex trafficer, continued that friendships for years after being convicted, let said individual into the heart of royal family with invites to parties for their kids, and then has lied repeatedly about it.
The obsession is from republicans, maybe including you, when there is no evidence Andrew did anything illegal no matter how stupid and when you largely ignore the likes of Trump, Clinton, Bill Gates, Kevin Spacey, Mandelson etc who were also in Epstein's orbit
Quite.
I think HY misses the point. I am (very gently) a monarchist, for the reasons OLB wrote upthread. But I can also see that our Royal Family, if they are to play any sensible function in modern society, should be held to a higher moral standard than politicians or actors. The late Queen did this very well and, notwithstanding his complicated relationships with Diana and Camilla, so does Charles imv. Thus when a fairly senior Royal is found to be in Epstein's world, I think it rightly gets more focus than a list of Americans or a politician who is known already to be pretty odious.
Not just any old Americans, TWO US Presidents were in those in Epstein's world, they are/were actual US heads of state and government, Andrew isn't even in top 5 in line of accession now
True, and in many ways the US Presidency is very close to a monarchy. But I think the point still stands.
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
If Roger's post that he is an English teacher was any more than a Swan and Paedo fantasy, then it's about 4 months' salary for a high school teacher ( https://bdeex.com/ethiopia/ )
That's pretty good money for just a bit of paedo joshing and three months inside
Entirely self-indulgent, apologies. My photo quota of the day.
Wow. Which one is you?
Green helmet. Viewcode: Pic was taken by our coach, who was also in the door (it's a very wide-angle camera). You can just see her arm with the black band on it in the bottom left of the picture.
BTW what plane was it please? Obviously specially adapted anyway with the commuter monkey-hanger bars.
A Cessna Grand Caravan (with something called a Blackhawk conversion to make the engine more powerful). They're standard fare in the skydiving world.
I once jumped out of an old Russian Mi-8 helicopter in the Slovak republic, but it was somewhat sketchy - it rattled a lot at 14,000 ft!
Thank you! Obviously moved on from Antonov 2s and Beavers etc.
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
Doesn’t suggest that Nauru’s an attractive place to visit!
Doesn't say whether the crims come from Nauru in the first place.
It's about 8 sq miles and basically a derelict birdshit mine (worked out). Population about 10K, which is a lot for somewhere smaller than the Isle of Eigg.
Entirely self-indulgent, apologies. My photo quota of the day.
Wow. Which one is you?
Green helmet. Viewcode: Pic was taken by our coach, who was also in the door (it's a very wide-angle camera). You can just see her arm with the black band on it in the bottom left of the picture.
Mourning band? Might be a bit disconcerting to see this on your parachute instructor.
The best hope for Republicans is that the William and Kate kids grow up well-adjusted enough to realise that they don't want to be part of the circus and abdicate when they reach adulthood.
Why should we give republicans hope?
PB is a very weird demographic that seems to have ideological objections to monarchy.
Most of us love it.
Republicans might have hope regardless of what you think about it.
PB is not so weird a demographic. Plenty of people would choose to get rid of the monarchy, and I'd expect people with a bias to systematic/logical thinking would tend to be more likely to be Republicans.
Exit poll in Holland expected at 8pm UkTime. My Brother who lives in amsterdam is voting for the 'Party for the Animals' or Green/Socialist. Should be close.
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
Yes - as someone who endured this and worse at 14 and on numerous occasions since then it is creepy and criminal and very common.
And it is very common because men like you, I'm sorry to say, do not take it seriously, underplay it because it has happened "since time immemorial" (your words) so girls should just put up with it and it is far too much expense and bother to build the facilities to lock up the men who make women and girls' life a misery with this sort of behaviour.
What is needed instead is for us to clamp down hard on men who do this, the first time they do it to send a very clear message that this is intolerable and will not be tolerated. Instead of expecting women to endure it, letting such men carry on with their repellent behaviour for years then being all shocked when they carry out some appalling crime and we learn of all the previous occasions when we turned a blind eye or were far too lenient because .... Well why? Because men can never be expected to behave or accept the consequences of their actions, apparently.
Women are so fucking fed up and furious at being thought of as second class citizens whose interests don't matter, whose rights to basic decency must always come second to those of men. Every single fucking day in this country we see example after example of this contempt for women and girls, even from professionals such as @ Foxy who might be expected to know better.
Women can be victims of unwanted male behaviour in any culture. But it is the reality of cultural differences in male/female relations that mean blind ideologues like Foxy won't take it seriously because it doesn't suit their politics.
For entirely practical reasons many British Jews are concerned about large numbers of migrants coming to the UK from cultures where Jew hatred (and I do mean hatred) is widespread. That's a perfectly reasonable concern.
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
Doesn’t suggest that Nauru’s an attractive place to visit!
Doesn't say whether the crims come from Nauru in the first place.
It's about 8 sq miles and basically a derelict birdshit mine (worked out). Population about 10K, which is a lot for somewhere smaller than the Isle of Eigg.
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
Doesn’t suggest that Nauru’s an attractive place to visit!
Doesn't say whether the crims come from Nauru in the first place.
It's about 8 sq miles and basically a derelict birdshit mine (worked out). Population about 10K, which is a lot for somewhere smaller than the Isle of Eigg.
I don’t think they're ‘native Naureans’; if indeed there are any such. Deeply unattractive, anyway.
When I was young I opposed the monarchy on the grounds that it sanctified the principle of hereditary privilege and I'd argue that case quite strongly in a loud voice with some jabbing of fingers. These days I've become a bit more susceptible to the sort of 'would the alternative be an improvement in practice?' prevarication befitting of a man in his mid-sixties. Still, if there were a Keep/Scrap referendum I'd probably vote S. It's essentially a crazy way to select a head of state.
Referendums are of course pointless as Brexit proved anyway. MPs and peers refused to vote to implement Brexit and the signed Withdrawal Agreements for 3 years after the 2016 EU referendum Leave vote and only the Conservative majority at the 2019 general election got it done.
So unless the Greens win a general election majority we will likely always keep our constitutional monarchy
After the Brexit debacle I think I'm more opposed to Referendums than I am the Monarchy.
David Runciman had a rather thoughtful podcast on referendums recently. They do seem to do them a lot better in many other countries.
And the turnout for the Brexit referendum was impressively high.
The best hope for Republicans is that the William and Kate kids grow up well-adjusted enough to realise that they don't want to be part of the circus and abdicate when they reach adulthood.
Why should we give republicans hope?
PB is a very weird demographic that seems to have ideological objections to monarchy.
Most of us love it.
Republicans might have hope regardless of what you think about it.
PB is not so weird a demographic. Plenty of people would choose to get rid of the monarchy, and I'd expect people with a bias to systematic/logical thinking would tend to be more likely to be Republicans.
I think that explains the PB plurality view; it's dominated by posters who see look for logic in everything, and can't see it in the monarchy.
That said, I think that's part of the appeal: monarchy humanises the State with a real family which, coupled with the ceremony and ritual, provides something both special that logic cannot.
It also explains why Andrew doesn't really damage it: every family has a black sheep, and people recognise that.
I could have also added that Australia has quite a bit of experience in dealing with deported foreign criminals.
They weren't foreign at the time (the question of the Irish until 1801 aside) The various colonies were entirely British. Would have been shocked to see you say that.
When I was young I opposed the monarchy on the grounds that it sanctified the principle of hereditary privilege and I'd argue that case quite strongly in a loud voice with some jabbing of fingers. These days I've become a bit more susceptible to the sort of 'would the alternative be an improvement in practice?' prevarication befitting of a man in his mid-sixties. Still, if there were a Keep/Scrap referendum I'd probably vote S. It's essentially a crazy way to select a head of state.
Referendums are of course pointless as Brexit proved anyway. MPs and peers refused to vote to implement Brexit and the signed Withdrawal Agreements for 3 years after the 2016 EU referendum Leave vote and only the Conservative majority at the 2019 general election got it done.
So unless the Greens win a general election majority we will likely always keep our constitutional monarchy
After the Brexit debacle I think I'm more opposed to Referendums than I am the Monarchy.
David Runciman had a rather thoughtful podcast on referendums recently. They do seem to do them a lot better in many other countries.
And the turnout for the Brexit referendum was impressively high.
So much time has passed and the vote expressing the people's will still enrages so many on this site and beyond. It was decision I regret and not my will but respect for the will of the majority trumps my own pique. It's not a difficult concept. Heigh ho.
After the obsession in the media with the fact Andrew slept with a 17 year old, stupidly but legally in the UK given age of consent is 16 and over the fact he paid £8 million for the Royal Lodge lease and refurbishments for a, again legal, peppercorn rent little surprise. Not much mention of the fact Andrew is not even in the top 5 in line to the throne either or that Presidents Trump and ex President Clinton in US republic met Andrew unlike the King or William.
However, still a comfortable 18% lead for monarchy over republic even in the new MiC poll. A massive 66% of Tories for retaining the monarchy and a large 65% of Reform voters for retaining the monarchy as well. A significant 18% lead for retaining the monarchy amongst LD voters and a small 10% lead for the monarchy amongst Labour voters as well.
Clearly more Green voters want a republic than to keep the monarchy but given if Polansi won a majority he would whack up tax and nationalise so much industry and suck up to Hamas harder than Corbyn such that we would be a near Marxist state that would be the least of our worries.
Massive 71% approval rating for Prince William, just 8% negative and clear approval for the Princess of Wales too, both of whom have higher approval ratings than the King, Queen Consort and royal family overall. So when William becomes King the monarchy likely gets a bounce overall and with the young especially
It will cost a pretty penny to buy out 40? 50? years of peppercorn rent on that property.
After the obsession in the media with the fact Andrew slept with a 17 year old, stupidly but legally in the UK given age of consent is 16 and over the fact he paid £8 million for the Royal Lodge lease and refurbishments for a, again legal, peppercorn rent little surprise.
However, still a comfortable 18% lead for monarchy over republic even in the new MiC poll. A massive 66% of Tories for retaining the monarchy and a large 65% of Reform voters for retaining the monarchy as well. A significant 18% lead for retaining the monarchy amongst LD voters and a small 10% lead for the monarchy amongst Labour voters as well.
Clearly more Green voters want a republic than to keep the monarchy but given if Polansi won a majority he would whack up tax and nationalise so much industry and suck up to Hamas harder than Corbyn so we would be a near Marxist state that would be the least of our worries.
What is going on with people on here over the past few days trying to miminize some terrible behaviour.
The obsession isn't JUST he did this one thing, it is the girl at the time was being trafficked, that a senior member of the royal was best buds with a profilic sex trafficer, continued that friendships for years after being convicted, let said individual into the heart of royal family with invites to parties for their kids, and then has lied repeatedly about it. And we keep finding out more and more.
And the girl said she saw Andrew having sex with girls who were under 16 on Epstein's island.
I believe it was girls who LOOKED LIKE they were under 16.
After the obsession in the media with the fact Andrew slept with a 17 year old, stupidly but legally in the UK given age of consent is 16 and over the fact he paid £8 million for the Royal Lodge lease and refurbishments for a, again legal, peppercorn rent little surprise. Not much mention of the fact Andrew is not even in the top 5 in line to the throne either or that Presidents Trump and ex President Clinton in US republic met Andrew unlike the King or William.
However, still a comfortable 18% lead for monarchy over republic even in the new MiC poll. A massive 66% of Tories for retaining the monarchy and a large 65% of Reform voters for retaining the monarchy as well. A significant 18% lead for retaining the monarchy amongst LD voters and a small 10% lead for the monarchy amongst Labour voters as well.
Clearly more Green voters want a republic than to keep the monarchy but given if Polansi won a majority he would whack up tax and nationalise so much industry and suck up to Hamas harder than Corbyn such that we would be a near Marxist state that would be the least of our worries.
Massive 71% approval rating for Prince William, just 8% negative and clear approval for the Princess of Wales too, both of whom have higher approval ratings than the King, Queen Consort and royal family overall. So when William becomes King the monarchy likely gets a bounce overall and with the young especially
It will cost a pretty penny to buy out 40? 50? years of peppercorn rent on that property.
I think a constitutional monarchy is a much better system than a political head of state. The big drawback is the pressure it places on one individual. Not at all surprising if that individual would decide not for him/her.
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
The problem, frankly, is that people here feel unsafe due to immigration. There may be racist attitudes, and/or concerns about integration too. But the killer perception is that we are seeing an influx of "fighting age" young men from a very different, not to say, hostile culture. Whether this is a fair perception, in the overall scheme of things, I've no idea. But it is a political disaster and acting as rocket fuel for the populist far right. It's completely dominating the news cycle, including the BBC.
The political class needs to put one side its fear of seeming to condone, or accommodate racism, and act. This is no longer the 1970s and the battle against old-style racism has been largely won, as we can see by the prominence of so many BAME people in public life now. This is a different kind of conflict zone.
@Leon (what happened to him?) was, unfortunately, right about this.
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
Doesn’t suggest that Nauru’s an attractive place to visit!
Doesn't say whether the crims come from Nauru in the first place.
It's about 8 sq miles and basically a derelict birdshit mine (worked out). Population about 10K, which is a lot for somewhere smaller than the Isle of Eigg.
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
Doesn’t suggest that Nauru’s an attractive place to visit!
Doesn't say whether the crims come from Nauru in the first place.
It's about 8 sq miles and basically a derelict birdshit mine (worked out). Population about 10K, which is a lot for somewhere smaller than the Isle of Eigg.
I don’t think they're ‘native Naureans’; if indeed there are any such. Deeply unattractive, anyway.
It's not self-sufficient in food, which has to be imported, or in *drinking water* either. "Schools are frequently forced to close because they do not have reliable toilets or drinking water for students to use" says Wiki in a gruesome piece on the place. Definitely one for Leon to try, or perhaps not.
From two threads ago, on the subject of Daylight Savings Time, I would point out that some parts of Arizona observe daylights savings time, while others do not.
It results in some interestingly creative attempts to commit insurance fraud.
I think a constitutional monarchy is a much better system than a political head of state. The big drawback is the pressure it places on one individual. Not at all surprising if that individual would decide not for him/her.
The alternatives are either a ceremonial President that no-one knows or cares about (Germany or Ireland) or a political President that everybody does (France or the USA) where the ceremony rancours.
I can't see any alternative that provides anything like the same benefits for the UK.
I think a constitutional monarchy is a much better system than a political head of state. The big drawback is the pressure it places on one individual. Not at all surprising if that individual would decide not for him/her.
The alternatives are either a ceremonial President that no-one knows or cares about (Germany or Ireland) or a political President that everybody does (France or the USA) where the ceremony rancours.
I can't see any alternative that provides anything like the same benefits for the UK.
Yes - as someone who endured this and worse at 14 and on numerous occasions since then it is creepy and criminal and very common.
And it is very common because men like you, I'm sorry to say, do not take it seriously, underplay it because it has happened "since time immemorial" (your words) so girls should just put up with it and it is far too much expense and bother to build the facilities to lock up the men who make women and girls' life a misery with this sort of behaviour.
What is needed instead is for us to clamp down hard on men who do this, the first time they do it to send a very clear message that this is intolerable and will not be tolerated. Instead of expecting women to endure it, letting such men carry on with their repellent behaviour for years then being all shocked when they carry out some appalling crime and we learn of all the previous occasions when we turned a blind eye or were far too lenient because .... Well why? Because men can never be expected to behave or accept the consequences of their actions, apparently.
Women are so fucking fed up and furious at being thought of as second class citizens whose interests don't matter, whose rights to basic decency must always come second to those of men. Every single fucking day in this country we see example after example of this contempt for women and girls, even from professionals such as @ Foxy who might be expected to know better.
I did not deny that it was an act that neded dealing with by the police, and that it is an offense. I stressed in my first post on this that it should not be tolerated at 0756 today.
All I called into question was whether a custodial sentence was appropriate.
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
The problem, frankly, is that people here feel unsafe due to immigration. There may be racist attitudes, and/or concerns about integration too. But the killer perception is that we are seeing an influx of "fighting age" young men from a very different, not to say, hostile culture. Whether this is a fair perception, in the overall scheme of things, I've no idea. But it is a political disaster and acting as rocket fuel for the populist far right. It's completely dominating the news cycle, including the BBC.
The political class needs to put one side its fear of seeming to condone, or accommodate racism, and act. This is no longer the 1970s and the battle against old-style racism has been largely won, as we can see by the prominence of so many BAME people in public life now. This is a different kind of conflict zone.
@Leon (what happened to him?) was, unfortunately, right about this.
Isn't the headline and ensuing discussion perhaps conflating criminals with migrants? The issue is important given how small Nauru is - they even import drinking water.
If we were starting a country from scratch, would we choose to have a monarchy? Of course not.
But we're not.
And there isn't a really good reason that I can see to actually get rid of the monarchy. Nor is there any settled view on what we should replace it with.
So, I'm voting to keep it.
I fundamentally believe that someone shouldn't be born into a position simply by having the right parents. Why is King Charles king? Because of his mother. In no other area of life do we expect this to be the case (although nepotism is strong in politics and the arts).
Greg Penner is the chairman of Walmart, I believe. He's only that because he's Sam Walton's son-in-law.
Thats a private business, not paid for by taxation. Same way I don't object to people inheriting houses etc. But thats different to the royal family. I'm expected to call Charles 'Your Royal Highness" simply because of whose vagina he emerged from.
You are not required to call Charles "Your Royal Highness". It's a custom, but you won't be arrested if you call him Mr Windsor.
(#pbpedantry It's not about the vagina he transited. If he'd been born by Caesarean section, he'd still be King. If the Queen's egg had been mixed with Prince Charles' sperm in a petri dish and then the resulting early embryo implanted in a surrogate's womb, he'd still be King, I guess?)
I believe it needs to be “of the body born” so surrogates don’t count
If Roger's post that he is an English teacher was any more than a Swan and Paedo fantasy, then it's about 4 months' salary for a high school teacher ( https://bdeex.com/ethiopia/ )
That's pretty good money for just a bit of paedo joshing and three months inside
If Roger's post that he is an English teacher was any more than a Swan and Paedo fantasy, then it's about 4 months' salary for a high school teacher ( https://bdeex.com/ethiopia/ )
That's pretty good money for just a bit of paedo joshing and three months inside
You sound very bitter...
I'm concerned that we may have created an incentive for "asylum" trips to the UK - it's over 18 months average pay ffs
My poor pay is a matter of record on here, nice of you to poke fun at it
If Roger's post that he is an English teacher was any more than a Swan and Paedo fantasy, then it's about 4 months' salary for a high school teacher ( https://bdeex.com/ethiopia/ )
That's pretty good money for just a bit of paedo joshing and three months inside
You sound very bitter...
I'm concerned that we may have created an incentive for "asylum" trips to the UK - it's over 18 months average pay ffs
My poor pay is a matter of record on here, nice of you to poke fun at it
I never even mentioned your pay! For that matter I suspect it is significantly higher than my pension.
If Roger's post that he is an English teacher was any more than a Swan and Paedo fantasy, then it's about 4 months' salary for a high school teacher ( https://bdeex.com/ethiopia/ )
That's pretty good money for just a bit of paedo joshing and three months inside
You sound very bitter...
I'm concerned that we may have created an incentive for "asylum" trips to the UK - it's over 18 months average pay ffs
My poor pay is a matter of record on here, nice of you to poke fun at it
He actually took a low ball offer, £2k is up for grabs.
The internet currently thinks you are Daftbloke McDuff and you have always voted for the Whigs, will inherit Wiltshire, and shop in Aldi for your steel refineries. Now I know much of that is true, but we can't have the world knowing all our secrets.
When you type "google.com" into your browser, the browser doesn't know where "google.com" is. DNS enables the browser to look up the name (eg "www.google.com"), find the IP address (eg "173.194.39.78"), and go find that instead, because it knows how to do that.
When you type "google.com" into your browser, the browser doesn't know where "google.com" is. DNS enables the browser to look up the name (eg "www.google.com"), find the IP address (eg "173.194.39.78"), and go find that instead, because it knows how to do that.
Suella is another numpty who will be loudly praising the camps even as she is being locked up in one. Maybe she'll get to share a bunk-bed with Kemi and Mrs Farage
Headline numbers aren't that interesting, but the supplementals show the Greens have the Maomentum.
Surely the 32% combined Labour and Green vote is of more interest, given no chance of the Greens ever doing a deal with Reform?
Still just behind the 33% for Reform, though add the LDs and SNP too to Labour and the Greens and you get to 46%, well ahead of Reform.
Add the Tory total to Reform's though in turn and you get to 51%, albeit about a quarter to a third of Tories would go LD on a forced choice over Reform
On topic, of the twenty countries with the highest human development indices, twelve are constitutional monarchies (UK, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Luxembourg, Lichtenstein). Constitutional monarchy fulfills the basic test of a polity. It works.
Ok so we are nearing the end of the 2025 election season - Tuesday will see a raft of state and local elections in the US, including the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorials and the New York city mayoral.
If you love pure PR, a multi-party system, drawn-out coalition negotiations, and governments that often collapse early, the Dutch political scene is the one for you.
I'll post further links if I find any better live maps etc - one of Schiermonnikoog, Rozendaal, or Renswoude is likely to be the first result declared, although this may take a while with the beach towel-sized ballot papers.
Yes - as someone who endured this and worse at 14 and on numerous occasions since then it is creepy and criminal and very common.
And it is very common because men like you, I'm sorry to say, do not take it seriously, underplay it because it has happened "since time immemorial" (your words) so girls should just put up with it and it is far too much expense and bother to build the facilities to lock up the men who make women and girls' life a misery with this sort of behaviour.
What is needed instead is for us to clamp down hard on men who do this, the first time they do it to send a very clear message that this is intolerable and will not be tolerated. Instead of expecting women to endure it, letting such men carry on with their repellent behaviour for years then being all shocked when they carry out some appalling crime and we learn of all the previous occasions when we turned a blind eye or were far too lenient because .... Well why? Because men can never be expected to behave or accept the consequences of their actions, apparently.
Women are so fucking fed up and furious at being thought of as second class citizens whose interests don't matter, whose rights to basic decency must always come second to those of men. Every single fucking day in this country we see example after example of this contempt for women and girls, even from professionals such as @ Foxy who might be expected to know better.
I did not deny that it was an act that neded dealing with by the police, and that it is an offense. I stressed in my first post on this that it should not be tolerated at 0756 today.
All I called into question was whether a custodial sentence was appropriate.
Your posts absolutely downplayed the crime. He physically assaulted two women, one being a 14 year old child. You also chose not to find the judges comments when passing sentence which made it clear why a custodial was necessary
On topic, of the twenty countries with the highest human development indices, twelve are constitutional monarchies (UK, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Luxembourg, Lichtenstein). Constitutional monarchy fulfills the basic test of a polity. It works.
A high tax burden monarchy might be just the compromise we've been looking for
The best hope for Republicans is that the William and Kate kids grow up well-adjusted enough to realise that they don't want to be part of the circus and abdicate when they reach adulthood.
Why should we give republicans hope?
PB is a very weird demographic that seems to have ideological objections to monarchy.
Most of us love it.
Republicans might have hope regardless of what you think about it.
PB is not so weird a demographic. Plenty of people would choose to get rid of the monarchy, and I'd expect people with a bias to systematic/logical thinking would tend to be more likely to be Republicans.
Uh no, the only party which has most of its voters backing a republic are the Greens and the Greens are not showing a systematic or logical approach to their proposals for government, certainly not in terms of their socialist economics
Headline numbers aren't that interesting, but the supplementals show the Greens have the Maomentum.
Only because YourSultanasParty haven't got their act together.
Green vote will drop by a 1/3 maybe more if/when they ever do.
I am starting to wonder if the fruit and nutters have missed their chance and allowed a calmer more telegenic bloke to steal all their limelight.
As one of their target voters, the two parties seem indistiguishable to me except that one has incessant infighting and seems self-obsessed and the other is organised, vocal and increasingly popular (if a bit mad).
Some good news for Kemi, the Tories now lead Reform with 18-28 year olds according to MiC. Only problem is they also still trail not only Labour but also the Greens with the youngest age group.
Ok so we are nearing the end of the 2025 election season - Tuesday will see a raft of state and local elections in the US, including the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorials and the New York city mayoral.
If you love pure PR, a multi-party system, drawn-out coalition negotiations, and governments that often collapse early, the Dutch political scene is the one for you.
I'll post further links if I find any better live maps etc - one of Schiermonnikoog, Rozendaal, or Renswoude is likely to be the first result declared, although this may take a while with the beach towel-sized ballot papers.
Yes - as someone who endured this and worse at 14 and on numerous occasions since then it is creepy and criminal and very common.
And it is very common because men like you, I'm sorry to say, do not take it seriously, underplay it because it has happened "since time immemorial" (your words) so girls should just put up with it and it is far too much expense and bother to build the facilities to lock up the men who make women and girls' life a misery with this sort of behaviour.
What is needed instead is for us to clamp down hard on men who do this, the first time they do it to send a very clear message that this is intolerable and will not be tolerated. Instead of expecting women to endure it, letting such men carry on with their repellent behaviour for years then being all shocked when they carry out some appalling crime and we learn of all the previous occasions when we turned a blind eye or were far too lenient because .... Well why? Because men can never be expected to behave or accept the consequences of their actions, apparently.
Women are so fucking fed up and furious at being thought of as second class citizens whose interests don't matter, whose rights to basic decency must always come second to those of men. Every single fucking day in this country we see example after example of this contempt for women and girls, even from professionals such as @ Foxy who might be expected to know better.
I did not deny that it was an act that neded dealing with by the police, and that it is an offense. I stressed in my first post on this that it should not be tolerated at 0756 today.
All I called into question was whether a custodial sentence was appropriate.
Why would a custodial sentence be inappropriate?
And if a custodial sentence is not given in what way are we showing - not just saying - that such acts should not be tolerated?
See for instance the number of men convicted of having child porn images, some of the very worst kind, who are very often sent to prison. Listen to the excuses given: "stress" and "good character" and so on. Then we wonder at why it is so prevalent.
As for @maxh's question - sentiments, even horrible ones, are not crimes. It is actions which are crimes and words which incite violence. Thoughts are not crimes. So if someone attacks an immigrant or a trans person etc of course they should be dealt with firmly. Equally if those groups commit crimes they should be dealt with firmly. I would only note that the police do not take an even handed approach on this. It is apparently ok to make all kinds of threats of violence or commit actual violence against women, often in public places, with the police doing nothing at all.
Some good news for Kemi, the Tories now lead Reform with 18-28 year olds according to MiC. Only problem is they also still trail not only Labour but also the Greens with the youngest age group.
Headline numbers aren't that interesting, but the supplementals show the Greens have the Maomentum.
Surely the 32% combined Labour and Green vote is of more interest, given no chance of the Greens ever doing a deal with Reform?
Still just behind the 33% for Reform, though add the LDs and SNP too to Labour and the Greens and you get to 46%, well ahead of Reform.
Add the Tory total to Reform's though in turn and you get to 51%, albeit about a quarter to a third of Tories would go LD on a forced choice over Reform
When you type "google.com" into your browser, the browser doesn't know where "google.com" is. DNS enables the browser to look up the name (eg "www.google.com"), find the IP address (eg "173.194.39.78"), and go find that instead, because it knows how to do that.
So if DNS goes down, the internet breaks.
Bring back the yellow pages.....
There actually was a Yellow Pages but they (well, Sun) had to change its name because BT owned the trademark. It was more of an AD or LDAP equivalent rather than DNS.
"Lee Anderson: I gamed the system to get people on benefits MP says welfare advisers are skilled at manipulating the claims process as Reform announces plan to restrict PIPs"
Some good news for Kemi, the Tories now lead Reform with 18-28 year olds according to MiC. Only problem is they also still trail not only Labour but also the Greens with the youngest age group.
34% for right wing parties, among the youngest voters, seems quite healthy.
There are a lot of Reformey young people in the new media space but little evidence that the party itself is building on it. Very much still the Farage show.
Some good news for Kemi, the Tories now lead Reform with 18-28 year olds according to MiC. Only problem is they also still trail not only Labour but also the Greens with the youngest age group.
Big moment at #PMQs. Keir Starmer refused to say he would stand by Labour’s manifesto promise not to raise income tax, national insurance, VAT or corporation tax. It is increasingly clear the budget will include a significant rise in income tax - because it is the only clean way, ministers believe, to fill the £35bn budget black hole.
Fantastic result for D66 - their best ever. Much better from VVD than seemed likely but not so good for GL/PVDA but only an exit poll, real numbers to follow.
Yes - as someone who endured this and worse at 14 and on numerous occasions since then it is creepy and criminal and very common.
And it is very common because men like you, I'm sorry to say, do not take it seriously, underplay it because it has happened "since time immemorial" (your words) so girls should just put up with it and it is far too much expense and bother to build the facilities to lock up the men who make women and girls' life a misery with this sort of behaviour.
What is needed instead is for us to clamp down hard on men who do this, the first time they do it to send a very clear message that this is intolerable and will not be tolerated. Instead of expecting women to endure it, letting such men carry on with their repellent behaviour for years then being all shocked when they carry out some appalling crime and we learn of all the previous occasions when we turned a blind eye or were far too lenient because .... Well why? Because men can never be expected to behave or accept the consequences of their actions, apparently.
Women are so fucking fed up and furious at being thought of as second class citizens whose interests don't matter, whose rights to basic decency must always come second to those of men. Every single fucking day in this country we see example after example of this contempt for women and girls, even from professionals such as @ Foxy who might be expected to know better.
I did not deny that it was an act that neded dealing with by the police, and that it is an offense. I stressed in my first post on this that it should not be tolerated at 0756 today.
All I called into question was whether a custodial sentence was appropriate.
Why would a custodial sentence be inappropriate?
And if a custodial sentence is not given in what way are we showing - not just saying - that such acts should not be tolerated?
See for instance the number of men convicted of having child porn images, some of the very worst kind, who are very often sent to prison. Listen to the excuses given: "stress" and "good character" and so on. Then we wonder at why it is so prevalent.
As for @maxh's question - sentiments, even horrible ones, are not crimes. It is actions which are crimes and words which incite violence. Thoughts are not crimes. So if someone attacks an immigrant or a trans person etc of course they should be dealt with firmly. Equally if those groups commit crimes they should be dealt with firmly. I would only note that the police do not take an even handed approach on this. It is apparently ok to make all kinds of threats of violence or commit actual violence against women, often in public places, with the police doing nothing at all.
Thanks Cyclefree - that difference is obvious now you have pointed it out and I am embarrassed that you needed to do so! And of course there are instances of actual crimes in relation to eg inciting violence against immigrants that are clamped down on very harshly.
Yes - as someone who endured this and worse at 14 and on numerous occasions since then it is creepy and criminal and very common.
And it is very common because men like you, I'm sorry to say, do not take it seriously, underplay it because it has happened "since time immemorial" (your words) so girls should just put up with it and it is far too much expense and bother to build the facilities to lock up the men who make women and girls' life a misery with this sort of behaviour.
What is needed instead is for us to clamp down hard on men who do this, the first time they do it to send a very clear message that this is intolerable and will not be tolerated. Instead of expecting women to endure it, letting such men carry on with their repellent behaviour for years then being all shocked when they carry out some appalling crime and we learn of all the previous occasions when we turned a blind eye or were far too lenient because .... Well why? Because men can never be expected to behave or accept the consequences of their actions, apparently.
Women are so fucking fed up and furious at being thought of as second class citizens whose interests don't matter, whose rights to basic decency must always come second to those of men. Every single fucking day in this country we see example after example of this contempt for women and girls, even from professionals such as @ Foxy who might be expected to know better.
I did not deny that it was an act that neded dealing with by the police, and that it is an offense. I stressed in my first post on this that it should not be tolerated at 0756 today.
All I called into question was whether a custodial sentence was appropriate.
Why would a custodial sentence be inappropriate?
And if a custodial sentence is not given in what way are we showing - not just saying - that such acts should not be tolerated?
See for instance the number of men convicted of having child porn images, some of the very worst kind, who are very often sent to prison. Listen to the excuses given: "stress" and "good character" and so on. Then we wonder at why it is so prevalent.
As for @maxh's question - sentiments, even horrible ones, are not crimes. It is actions which are crimes and words which incite violence. Thoughts are not crimes. So if someone attacks an immigrant or a trans person etc of course they should be dealt with firmly. Equally if those groups commit crimes they should be dealt with firmly. I would only note that the police do not take an even handed approach on this. It is apparently ok to make all kinds of threats of violence or commit actual violence against women, often in public places, with the police doing nothing at all.
I think there are reasonable alternatives to prison for many offences, and that prison is an expensive way of making bad people worse.
While his circumstances are more unusual, in that there probably is significant flight risk so remand probably required, but if he was a British citizen then he probably would be better punished by being placed on the sexual offenders register and a suspended sentence.
If you really want to tackle the issue of preventing re-offending by paedophiles then systems like "circles of support" are probably the best system.
Yes - as someone who endured this and worse at 14 and on numerous occasions since then it is creepy and criminal and very common.
And it is very common because men like you, I'm sorry to say, do not take it seriously, underplay it because it has happened "since time immemorial" (your words) so girls should just put up with it and it is far too much expense and bother to build the facilities to lock up the men who make women and girls' life a misery with this sort of behaviour.
What is needed instead is for us to clamp down hard on men who do this, the first time they do it to send a very clear message that this is intolerable and will not be tolerated. Instead of expecting women to endure it, letting such men carry on with their repellent behaviour for years then being all shocked when they carry out some appalling crime and we learn of all the previous occasions when we turned a blind eye or were far too lenient because .... Well why? Because men can never be expected to behave or accept the consequences of their actions, apparently.
Women are so fucking fed up and furious at being thought of as second class citizens whose interests don't matter, whose rights to basic decency must always come second to those of men. Every single fucking day in this country we see example after example of this contempt for women and girls, even from professionals such as @ Foxy who might be expected to know better.
I did not deny that it was an act that neded dealing with by the police, and that it is an offense. I stressed in my first post on this that it should not be tolerated at 0756 today.
All I called into question was whether a custodial sentence was appropriate.
Why would a custodial sentence be inappropriate?
And if a custodial sentence is not given in what way are we showing - not just saying - that such acts should not be tolerated?
See for instance the number of men convicted of having child porn images, some of the very worst kind, who are very often sent to prison. Listen to the excuses given: "stress" and "good character" and so on. Then we wonder at why it is so prevalent.
As for @maxh's question - sentiments, even horrible ones, are not crimes. It is actions which are crimes and words which incite violence. Thoughts are not crimes. So if someone attacks an immigrant or a trans person etc of course they should be dealt with firmly. Equally if those groups commit crimes they should be dealt with firmly. I would only note that the police do not take an even handed approach on this. It is apparently ok to make all kinds of threats of violence or commit actual violence against women, often in public places, with the police doing nothing at all.
The mods won't allow me to discuss my experience of it here but they frequently ignore crimes against trans women, too.
I am in absolute agreement with you that male violence against women - in my view against both cis and trans women - is a problem.
Not trying to get into an argument with you - some of the attitudes on display from various posters in recent days on historical crimes like Polanski's and the Epping sex pest - are exemplars of men minimising and excusing violence against women.
Fantastic result for D66 - their best ever. Much better from VVD than seemed likely but not so good for GL/PVDA but only an exit poll, real numbers to follow.
And now for 6 months of negiotations over coalitions.
Big moment at #PMQs. Keir Starmer refused to say he would stand by Labour’s manifesto promise not to raise income tax, national insurance, VAT or corporation tax. It is increasingly clear the budget will include a significant rise in income tax - because it is the only clean way, ministers believe, to fill the £35bn budget black hole.
I see Starmer and Reeves have refused to rule out income tax rises.
Which I presume means income tax rises are coming.
But but but the manifesto commitments.....and the last £40bn in tax rises that were to fix the foundations being a one off.....
It would be a very… brave… choice.
There’s a decent argument that they should’ve just done it last autumn and gotten it over with. To do it now, after having expended a lot of political capital telling everyone for the past 18 months you won’t, is going to be a pretty hard sell. Possibly terminal for the government, I think. See Bush 1990.
Of course the other choices (tinkering and trying to raise revenue through all sorts of other creative means) is poor economics, and unlikely to help.
I do think there has to be a good chance this is all expectations management though, so when they don’t raise it they can claim it as some sort of win.
Big moment at #PMQs. Keir Starmer refused to say he would stand by Labour’s manifesto promise not to raise income tax, national insurance, VAT or corporation tax. It is increasingly clear the budget will include a significant rise in income tax - because it is the only clean way, ministers believe, to fill the £35bn budget black hole.
I see Starmer and Reeves have refused to rule out income tax rises.
Which I presume means income tax rises are coming.
But but but the manifesto commitments.....and the last £40bn in tax rises that were to fix the foundations being a one off.....
It would be a very… brave… choice.
There’s a decent argument that they should’ve just done it last autumn and gotten it over with. To do it now, after having expended a lot of political capital telling everyone for the past 18 months you won’t, is going to be a pretty hard sell. Possibly terminal for the government, I think. See Bush 1990.
Of course the other choices (tinkering and trying to raise revenue through all sorts of other creative means) is poor economics, and unlikely to help.
I do think there has to be a good chance this is all expectations management though, so when they don’t raise it they can claim it as some sort of win.
I definitely think there has been a fair amount of anchoring going on.
On other polling, the discrepency between YouGov and More In Common is astonishing.
Putting the two numbers together for each party:
➡️ REF UK 27%/33% 🌹 LAB 17%/21% 🌳 CON 17%/18% 🔶 LIB DEM 15%/12% 🌍 GREEN 16%/11% 🟡 SNP 3%/2%
That level of divergence is huge and suggests very different sampling and weighting methodologies. It's not a question of who is "right" now but who (if either) will turn out to be right at the next GE.
Yes - as someone who endured this and worse at 14 and on numerous occasions since then it is creepy and criminal and very common.
And it is very common because men like you, I'm sorry to say, do not take it seriously, underplay it because it has happened "since time immemorial" (your words) so girls should just put up with it and it is far too much expense and bother to build the facilities to lock up the men who make women and girls' life a misery with this sort of behaviour.
What is needed instead is for us to clamp down hard on men who do this, the first time they do it to send a very clear message that this is intolerable and will not be tolerated. Instead of expecting women to endure it, letting such men carry on with their repellent behaviour for years then being all shocked when they carry out some appalling crime and we learn of all the previous occasions when we turned a blind eye or were far too lenient because .... Well why? Because men can never be expected to behave or accept the consequences of their actions, apparently.
Women are so fucking fed up and furious at being thought of as second class citizens whose interests don't matter, whose rights to basic decency must always come second to those of men. Every single fucking day in this country we see example after example of this contempt for women and girls, even from professionals such as @ Foxy who might be expected to know better.
I did not deny that it was an act that neded dealing with by the police, and that it is an offense. I stressed in my first post on this that it should not be tolerated at 0756 today.
All I called into question was whether a custodial sentence was appropriate.
Why would a custodial sentence be inappropriate?
And if a custodial sentence is not given in what way are we showing - not just saying - that such acts should not be tolerated?
See for instance the number of men convicted of having child porn images, some of the very worst kind, who are very often sent to prison. Listen to the excuses given: "stress" and "good character" and so on. Then we wonder at why it is so prevalent.
As for @maxh's question - sentiments, even horrible ones, are not crimes. It is actions which are crimes and words which incite violence. Thoughts are not crimes. So if someone attacks an immigrant or a trans person etc of course they should be dealt with firmly. Equally if those groups commit crimes they should be dealt with firmly. I would only note that the police do not take an even handed approach on this. It is apparently ok to make all kinds of threats of violence or commit actual violence against women, often in public places, with the police doing nothing at all.
I think there are reasonable alternatives to prison for many offences, and that prison is an expensive way of making bad people worse.
While his circumstances are more unusual, in that there probably is significant flight risk so remand probably required, but if he was a British citizen then he probably would be better punished by being placed on the sexual offenders register and a suspended sentence.
If you really want to tackle the issue of preventing re-offending by paedophiles then systems like "circles of support" are probably the best system.
Or deport them immediately if they have no right to be here. We can do it inside three days, apparently. No need for more than a week in jail for the offenders
Headline numbers aren't that interesting, but the supplementals show the Greens have the Maomentum.
Only because YourSultanasParty haven't got their act together.
Green vote will drop by a 1/3 maybe more if/when they ever do.
I am starting to wonder if the fruit and nutters have missed their chance and allowed a calmer more telegenic bloke to steal all their limelight.
Someone is going to have to provide a few details about Polanski's views and how his party actually acts. He and his party are not quite the cuddly outfit they like to pretend. They have, for instance, an approach to compliance with the law which is positively Trumpian and dangerous.
It will have to be me I sense.
But not this evening as I am on a train. I have had a very busy and enjoyable time in Edinburgh and, for anyone who can, the Andy Galsworthy exhibition is very well worth seeing. As is the main National Gallery which has some really superb art in there, including a portrait of one of my ancestors.
The only problem was the heat in there. Unbelievably hot. At one point I thought I'd have to take my top off to stop me fainting. And, really, what would the problem with that have been? I'd still have been more dressed that those in the portraits. Anyway I didn't, which is why you have been spared the story of the Lady Lawyer in the Gallery shouting "Look, it's a very nice Rigby& Peller bra. What is your problem?!"
On other polling, the discrepency between YouGov and More In Common is astonishing.
Putting the two numbers together for each party:
➡️ REF UK 27%/33% 🌹 LAB 17%/21% 🌳 CON 17%/18% 🔶 LIB DEM 15%/12% 🌍 GREEN 16%/11% 🟡 SNP 3%/2%
That level of divergence is huge and suggests very different sampling and weighting methodologies. It's not a question of who is "right" now but who (if either) will turn out to be right at the next GE.
I think that Yougov’s house effects under-record support for the Right.
Fantastic result for D66 - their best ever. Much better from VVD than seemed likely but not so good for GL/PVDA but only an exit poll, real numbers to follow.
And now for 6 months of negiotations over coalitions.
Possibly not - D66, VVD and CDA have governed together in the recent past (they formed the last Rutte Government). They would have 67 so short of the 75 needed but they could possibly get support from minor parties.
I see Starmer and Reeves have refused to rule out income tax rises.
Which I presume means income tax rises are coming.
It might do.
It used to be normal though for ministers to not publically comment on a budget in the weeks preceeding it being presented as it may influence market movements. This was a tradition that the last government often ignored.
On other polling, the discrepency between YouGov and More In Common is astonishing.
Putting the two numbers together for each party:
➡️ REF UK 27%/33% 🌹 LAB 17%/21% 🌳 CON 17%/18% 🔶 LIB DEM 15%/12% 🌍 GREEN 16%/11% 🟡 SNP 3%/2%
That level of divergence is huge and suggests very different sampling and weighting methodologies. It's not a question of who is "right" now but who (if either) will turn out to be right at the next GE.
I think that Yougov’s house effects under-record support for the Right.
I'm tempted to say - you would say that, wouldn't you?
Isn't it also possible More In Common's methodologies are exaggerating Reform support?
Big moment at #PMQs. Keir Starmer refused to say he would stand by Labour’s manifesto promise not to raise income tax, national insurance, VAT or corporation tax. It is increasingly clear the budget will include a significant rise in income tax - because it is the only clean way, ministers believe, to fill the £35bn budget black hole.
Fantastic result for D66 - their best ever. Much better from VVD than seemed likely but not so good for GL/PVDA but only an exit poll, real numbers to follow.
Comments
"Australia deports foreign criminals to remote Pacific island
Murderers, paedophiles, drug smugglers and other migrants are being sent to the tiny atoll of Nauru"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2025/10/28/australia-deports-foreign-criminals-pacific-island-nauru/?recomm_id=5fb1e59c-3812-4869-a602-ff97d4bd1023
But I think the point still stands.
If Roger's post that he is an English teacher was any more than a Swan and Paedo fantasy, then it's about 4 months' salary for a high school teacher ( https://bdeex.com/ethiopia/ )
That's pretty good money for just a bit of paedo joshing and three months inside
It's about 8 sq miles and basically a derelict birdshit mine (worked out). Population about 10K, which is a lot for somewhere smaller than the Isle of Eigg.
Might be a bit disconcerting to see this on your parachute instructor.
PB is not so weird a demographic. Plenty of people would choose to get rid of the monarchy, and I'd expect people with a bias to systematic/logical thinking would tend to be more likely to be Republicans.
For entirely practical reasons many British Jews are concerned about large numbers of migrants coming to the UK from cultures where Jew hatred (and I do mean hatred) is widespread. That's a perfectly reasonable concern.
And the turnout for the Brexit referendum was impressively high.
Something for Sunil to look forward to. (It's in old oil shale mining and refining country - where the oil industry began originally.)
That said, I think that's part of the appeal: monarchy humanises the State with a real family which, coupled with the ceremony and ritual, provides something both special that logic cannot.
It also explains why Andrew doesn't really damage it: every family has a black sheep, and people recognise that.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c2lp7wx740go
Either way it’s an unsubstantiated accusation
The problem, frankly, is that people here feel unsafe due to immigration. There may be racist attitudes, and/or concerns about integration too. But the killer perception is that we are seeing an influx of "fighting age" young men from a very different, not to say, hostile culture. Whether this is a fair perception, in the overall scheme of things, I've no idea. But it is a political disaster and acting as rocket fuel for the populist far right. It's completely dominating the news cycle, including the BBC.
The political class needs to put one side its fear of seeming to condone, or accommodate racism, and act. This is no longer the 1970s and the battle against old-style racism has been largely won, as we can see by the prominence of so many BAME people in public life now. This is a different kind of conflict zone.
@Leon (what happened to him?) was, unfortunately, right about this.
I can't see any alternative that provides anything like the same benefits for the UK.
All I called into question was whether a custodial sentence was appropriate.
My poor pay is a matter of record on here, nice of you to poke fun at it
A low desire society.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2025/7/31/2336178/-Japan-s-Quiet-Rebellion-Against-Growth-Instead-of-striving-for-more-Japan-simply-chose-less
Jesus wept.
Anti-white racism is rampant and must be stopped
Discrimination has crept into national life under the banner of progress"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/10/29/anti-white-racism-is-rampant-in-modern-britain/?recomm_id=054d61bd-4183-446e-a102-721153626696
So if DNS goes down, the internet breaks.
➡️ REF UK 33% (+2)
🌹 LAB 21% (-1)
🌳 CON 18% (-1)
🔶 LIB DEM 12% (-1)
🌍 GREEN 11% (+1)
🟡 SNP 2% (-)
N 2,030 | 24 -27/10 | Change w 20/10
https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3m4dafzc2uc27
Headline numbers aren't that interesting, but the supplementals show the Greens have the Maomentum.
Green vote will drop by a 1/3 maybe more if/when they ever do.
As someone in the white british category it's not something I've experienced in my many decades
Still just behind the 33% for Reform, though add the LDs and SNP too to Labour and the Greens and you get to 46%, well ahead of Reform.
Add the Tory total to Reform's though in turn and you get to 51%, albeit about a quarter to a third of Tories would go LD on a forced choice over Reform
Polls close 8pm GMT
https://nos.nl/collectie/14006/livestream/2588409-kijk-hier-live-nos-nederland-kiest-de-uitslagen
https://app.nos.nl/nieuws/tk2025/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Dutch_general_election
Ok so we are nearing the end of the 2025 election season - Tuesday will see a raft of state and local elections in the US, including the New Jersey and Virginia gubernatorials and the New York city mayoral.
If you love pure PR, a multi-party system, drawn-out coalition negotiations, and governments that often collapse early, the Dutch political scene is the one for you.
I'll post further links if I find any better live maps etc - one of Schiermonnikoog, Rozendaal, or Renswoude is likely to be the first result declared, although this may take a while with the beach towel-sized ballot papers.
Many thanks,
DC
You also claimed he was a victim of racism.
Cyclefree is absolutely right here.
So yes, I'd tend to agree with you.
Gen Z voting intention
Greens 29%
Labour 27%
Conservatives 18%
Reform 16%
LDs 5%
https://bsky.app/profile/luketryl.bsky.social/post/3m4dagecfbk27
And if a custodial sentence is not given in what way are we showing - not just saying - that such acts should not be tolerated?
See for instance the number of men convicted of having child porn images, some of the very worst kind, who are very often sent to prison. Listen to the excuses given: "stress" and "good character" and so on. Then we wonder at why it is so prevalent.
As for @maxh's question - sentiments, even horrible ones, are not crimes. It is actions which are crimes and words which incite violence. Thoughts are not crimes. So if someone attacks an immigrant or a trans person etc of course they should be dealt with firmly. Equally if those groups commit crimes they should be dealt with firmly. I would only note that the police do not take an even handed approach on this. It is apparently ok to make all kinds of threats of violence or commit actual violence against women, often in public places, with the police doing nothing at all.
MP says welfare advisers are skilled at manipulating the claims process as Reform announces plan to restrict PIPs"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/10/29/lee-anderson-mp-gamed-system-fittest-man-benefits-reform-uk
Even in 2019 the combined Conservative and Brexit Party vote was a mere 22% with 18 to 24s and 24% with 25-29s
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_election
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_United_Kingdom_general_election#Results
Which I presume means income tax rises are coming.
I find it baffling and enraging.
Robert Peston
@Peston
Big moment at #PMQs. Keir Starmer refused to say he would stand by Labour’s manifesto promise not to raise income tax, national insurance, VAT or corporation tax. It is increasingly clear the budget will include a significant rise in income tax - because it is the only clean way, ministers believe, to fill the £35bn budget black hole.
https://x.com/Peston/status/1983506906262995081
Peston says income tax rise coming.
I'm sure PBers will know what this means.
D66: 27
PVV: 25
VVD: 23
GL/PVDA: 20
CDA: 19
JA21: 9
Others: 27
Fantastic result for D66 - their best ever. Much better from VVD than seemed likely but not so good for GL/PVDA but only an exit poll, real numbers to follow.
While his circumstances are more unusual, in that there probably is significant flight risk so remand probably required, but if he was a British citizen then he probably would be better punished by being placed on the sexual offenders register and a suspended sentence.
If you really want to tackle the issue of preventing re-offending by paedophiles then systems like "circles of support" are probably the best system.
https://circles-uk.org.uk/about/#our_impact
I am in absolute agreement with you that male violence against women - in my view against both cis and trans women - is a problem.
Not trying to get into an argument with you - some of the attitudes on display from various posters in recent days on historical crimes like Polanski's and the Epping sex pest - are exemplars of men minimising and excusing violence against women.
There’s a decent argument that they should’ve just done it last autumn and gotten it over with. To do it now, after having expended a lot of political capital telling everyone for the past 18 months you won’t, is going to be a pretty hard sell. Possibly terminal for the government, I think. See Bush 1990.
Of course the other choices (tinkering and trying to raise revenue through all sorts of other creative means) is poor economics, and unlikely to help.
I do think there has to be a good chance this is all expectations management though, so when they don’t raise it they can claim it as some sort of win.
Putting the two numbers together for each party:
➡️ REF UK 27%/33%
🌹 LAB 17%/21%
🌳 CON 17%/18%
🔶 LIB DEM 15%/12%
🌍 GREEN 16%/11%
🟡 SNP 3%/2%
That level of divergence is huge and suggests very different sampling and weighting methodologies. It's not a question of who is "right" now but who (if either) will turn out to be right at the next GE.
It will have to be me I sense.
But not this evening as I am on a train. I have had a very busy and enjoyable time in Edinburgh and, for anyone who can, the Andy Galsworthy exhibition is very well worth seeing. As is the main National Gallery which has some really superb art in there, including a portrait of one of my ancestors.
The only problem was the heat in there. Unbelievably hot. At one point I thought I'd have to take my top off to stop me fainting. And, really, what would the problem with that have been? I'd still have been more dressed that those in the portraits. Anyway I didn't, which is why you have been spared the story of the Lady Lawyer in the Gallery shouting "Look, it's a very nice Rigby& Peller bra. What is your problem?!"
It used to be normal though for ministers to not publically comment on a budget in the weeks preceeding it being presented as it may influence market movements. This was a tradition that the last government often ignored.
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/community/blogs/philip-fisher/whatever-happened-to-budget-purdah
Isn't it also possible More In Common's methodologies are exaggerating Reform support?