Sir Keir will be thrilled that his cherished ideals of anglo-French co-operation will be retained after he leaves office.
*In seriousness, in the event that both Farage and Bardella are elected, minds are more than likely to change, but it's interesting nonetheless.
The Home Office and Civil Service simply won’t allow it.
I dont think towing overloaded dinghies is something that either coastguard or Royal Navy could do. Theres a very high risk of a capsize catastrophe.
Loading them onto a safe vessel and landing them back on the French coast is possible, but obviously needs French governmental support.
I wouldn’t advocate it for the reasons you outline. Whatever people think of these men and their motivations for coming here you cannot simply risk drowning them. It would be unacceptable.
I thought the Labour government told us that they were mostly women and children?
Perhaps they self-identify as women and children.
There's a long tradition of asylum seekers claiming to be children when they're not.
Specific quote of interest "Jahanzeb fled Afghanistan and underwent an age assessment after arriving in the UK in January, which concluded he was 17, Mr Williams said." But was he really 17?
Is this the case that was reported of the two Leamington spa boys committing a heinous attack on a girl ?
I used to work in Leamington and live in Kenilworth.
It used to be a nice place.
There are lots of parts of England that *used* to be a nice place. Hence, those with immediate memories kind of getting annoyed and looking for someone to put it right.
Lots of parts of Britain used to be pretty grim too. South London was in 1983, much smarter now. The Black Country was down in the dumps when I moved there in 1989 too, with closed factories everywhere as a sort of post Thatcher post industrial dystopia.
The dystopia was long before Thatcher, lets remember the Boys from the Blackstuff was a play written before she took office.
Since the Thatcher revolution, the improvements by Major and Blair with regional investment much of this was long gone. By the late 2000s (just as we went into the crash), much of what was unrecognisable squaller was gone.
Mid 2000s was peak UK. All ruined by the crash, the eastern european migration, the need for budgetary constraint following the great crash, the bandwidth taken up by Brexit, the inviting of the chancers of the earth to relocated to Europe by Merkel precipitating the refugee crisis and the boats, Covid (and the government's response) and the Boris wave.
We live in a materially worse state than we did, foreign young men shiftlessly wandering round the most provincial of towns, pestering the young women and committing petty crime, the movement of the high street to a highway of vape shops, barbers and mini markets that are openly recognised as fronts for organised crime. On that latter point that started off as a racist conspiracy is now an openly accepted fact across the political spectrum.
Any wonder people are going to vote for someone like Farge?
"Squalor", not "squaller". A squaller is something quite different!
As for the rest of your claims: balls.
I take it you live somewhere down south.
I fully recognize what @CumberlandGap is saying and equally can imagine someone in somewhere in the home counties not recognizing it.
But that’s because I live up north but spend a fair bit of time down south
More people live down south. If we are to describe the state of the nation, we can't just look at one region's experience, let alone that experience filtered through a rather loaded lens.
That's right, the people down south live, while the people up north exist.
Weighted mean has the population centred on the Daventry logistics centre (rather impressive really).
The Reform leader of Worcestershire County Council has sent the chairman of Worcester Labour Party a legal threat - demanding he stops mentioning her name in public.
Worcester city councillor Ed Kimberley has also been told he faces action if he publishes or shares any more "videos, posts or commentary" about Reform UK.
The Reform leader of Worcestershire County Council has sent the chairman of Worcester Labour Party a legal threat - demanding he stops mentioning her name in public.
Worcester city councillor Ed Kimberley has also been told he faces action if he publishes or shares any more "videos, posts or commentary" about Reform UK.
The rumours of major setbacks to the Russian operations are continuing to grow. It seems that Pokrovsk, far from being a Russian victory has been an utter bloodbath for them and the Ukrainians still have a foothold in the city. Meanwhile the Russians are facing continual degradation of capabilities and logistics that are forcing very unpleasant choices and may lead to the collapse of the Crimean perimeter.
As always Trump's grip on reality in Ukraine may as fake as everything else he says.
It's really hard to know what's going on in Pokrovsk. We won't know who has had the worst of the battle until some time afterwards.
I have seen exactly the same videos, just with different watermarks, on Reddit and Telegram being marketed as FPV strikes on Ukrainian or Russian forces depending on the platform.
Both sides are running relentless propaganda campaigns operated by pathological liars so who knows what the fuck is going on.
The only knowable fact at this point is that Trump has had e-fucking-nough of it. The SMO is degrading Russian military capabilities (yet also simultaneously improving it doctrinally and technologically) but that's not worth the $130bn (or whatever) that the US has pumped into a losing cause.
Given that the US has contribute zero over the past 11 months, that should not really be a problem.
My prediciton that the Tories will end up as the main beneficiaries of negative polarisation against Reform is looking good.
We’re a long way off that kind of result yet (Labour can still mount some recovery) but things get very interesting if the pensioner and middle class vote drifts back to the Tories, the WWC vote sticks with Reform, and the metropolitan young liberal vote goes to the Greens.
That turns into a big squeeze on the Labour vote that could be catastrophic for them. Again, not saying this is likely, but it is at least plausible.
Isnt a golden rule of the site's founder that the truth lies in the leader ratings with voting intention been a laggard?
On a personal basis I think she's doing fine..even a good job..but the public are clearly not considering the Tories as the alternative to Labour if/when they ditch them..🧐
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
Breaking: A federal judge blocked President Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles and ordered them returned to the control of the state’s governor.
“The founders designed our government to be a system of checks and balances. Defendants, however, make clear that the only check they want is a blank one,” US District Court Judge Breyer said.
Isnt a golden rule of the site's founder that the truth lies in the leader ratings with voting intention been a laggard?
On a personal basis I think she's doing fine..even a good job..but the public are clearly not considering the Tories as the alternative to Labour if/when they ditch them..🧐
This is a 3 to 4 year process and there is plenty of time for Farage and Reform to be found out
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
'Ghosts'? New expression to me (do their keyboards go OUIJA?).
My prediciton that the Tories will end up as the main beneficiaries of negative polarisation against Reform is looking good.
We’re a long way off that kind of result yet (Labour can still mount some recovery) but things get very interesting if the pensioner and middle class vote drifts back to the Tories, the WWC vote sticks with Reform, and the metropolitan young liberal vote goes to the Greens.
That turns into a big squeeze on the Labour vote that could be catastrophic for them. Again, not saying this is likely, but it is at least plausible.
Very small shifts in voting intention mean very big shifts in terms of seats.
If we assume that the right wing bloc of voters remains at 49% or so, then 22-23% leaves the Conservatives very much in the game. 19-21% sees them largely obliterated.
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
Glad Starmer has jumped in on this. As a human rights lawyer it's a little bit Nixon going to China. Good stuff.
Even if it fails, it sets the precedent that change is possible, and worshipping documents is bad.
It's more a case that he is still addicted to document worship but now feels the need to change the document, providing everybody else agrees first. He's not changing his mind so much as asking to be reprogrammed.
The rumours of major setbacks to the Russian operations are continuing to grow. It seems that Pokrovsk, far from being a Russian victory has been an utter bloodbath for them and the Ukrainians still have a foothold in the city. Meanwhile the Russians are facing continual degradation of capabilities and logistics that are forcing very unpleasant choices and may lead to the collapse of the Crimean perimeter.
As always Trump's grip on reality in Ukraine may as fake as everything else he says.
It's really hard to know what's going on in Pokrovsk. We won't know who has had the worst of the battle until some time afterwards.
What do you mean by "the collapse of the Crimean perimeter." Are you referring to the Zaporizhia front, where Russia made some advances recently?
The rumours of major setbacks to the Russian operations are continuing to grow. It seems that Pokrovsk, far from being a Russian victory has been an utter bloodbath for them and the Ukrainians still have a foothold in the city. Meanwhile the Russians are facing continual degradation of capabilities and logistics that are forcing very unpleasant choices and may lead to the collapse of the Crimean perimeter.
As always Trump's grip on reality in Ukraine may as fake as everything else he says.
It's really hard to know what's going on in Pokrovsk. We won't know who has had the worst of the battle until some time afterwards.
What do you mean by "the collapse of the Crimean perimeter." Are you referring to the Zaporizhia front, where Russia made some advances recently?
Russia has been fighting for 20 months, to take Pokrovsk. They’ll probably take it, at a cost of tens of thousands of casualties. But, the point of defence in depth is that you retreat a few kilometres to the next pile of rubble, and make them repeat the exercise. Competent armies avoid urban fighting, for that reason.
Yes. Unfortunately one of the corruption scandals in Ukraine regards money for defensive fortifications. And Ukraine are also susceptible to fighting in for political and propaganda reasons, as Syrski is credited with doing in Bakhmut.
The rumours of major setbacks to the Russian operations are continuing to grow. It seems that Pokrovsk, far from being a Russian victory has been an utter bloodbath for them and the Ukrainians still have a foothold in the city. Meanwhile the Russians are facing continual degradation of capabilities and logistics that are forcing very unpleasant choices and may lead to the collapse of the Crimean perimeter.
As always Trump's grip on reality in Ukraine may as fake as everything else he says.
It's really hard to know what's going on in Pokrovsk. We won't know who has had the worst of the battle until some time afterwards.
I have seen exactly the same videos, just with different watermarks, on Reddit and Telegram being marketed as FPV strikes on Ukrainian or Russian forces depending on the platform.
Both sides are running relentless propaganda campaigns operated by pathological liars so who knows what the fuck is going on.
The only knowable fact at this point is that Trump has had e-fucking-nough of it. The SMO is degrading Russian military capabilities (yet also simultaneously improving it doctrinally and technologically) but that's not worth the $130bn (or whatever) that the US has pumped into a losing cause.
Well we know that Ukraine are still in the city, and Russia claim they aren't.
As far as Trump is concerned, his opinion should no longer matter. Without skin in the game, he has .. no cards.
The rumours of major setbacks to the Russian operations are continuing to grow. It seems that Pokrovsk, far from being a Russian victory has been an utter bloodbath for them and the Ukrainians still have a foothold in the city. Meanwhile the Russians are facing continual degradation of capabilities and logistics that are forcing very unpleasant choices and may lead to the collapse of the Crimean perimeter.
As always Trump's grip on reality in Ukraine may as fake as everything else he says.
It's really hard to know what's going on in Pokrovsk. We won't know who has had the worst of the battle until some time afterwards.
I have seen exactly the same videos, just with different watermarks, on Reddit and Telegram being marketed as FPV strikes on Ukrainian or Russian forces depending on the platform.
Both sides are running relentless propaganda campaigns operated by pathological liars so who knows what the fuck is going on.
The only knowable fact at this point is that Trump has had e-fucking-nough of it. The SMO is degrading Russian military capabilities (yet also simultaneously improving it doctrinally and technologically) but that's not worth the $130bn (or whatever) that the US has pumped into a losing cause.
Well we know that Ukraine are still in the city, and Russia claim they aren't.
As far as Trump is concerned, his opinion should no longer matter. Without skin in the game, he has .. no cards.
My prediciton that the Tories will end up as the main beneficiaries of negative polarisation against Reform is looking good.
We’re a long way off that kind of result yet (Labour can still mount some recovery) but things get very interesting if the pensioner and middle class vote drifts back to the Tories, the WWC vote sticks with Reform, and the metropolitan young liberal vote goes to the Greens.
That turns into a big squeeze on the Labour vote that could be catastrophic for them. Again, not saying this is likely, but it is at least plausible.
Very small shifts in voting intention mean very big shifts in terms of seats.
If we assume that the right wing bloc of voters remains at 49% or so, then 22-23% leaves the Conservatives very much in the game. 19-21% sees them largely obliterated.
A marginal constituency is the equivalent of a swing state in US terms, but insted of only seven or so there are dozens of them.
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
As I understood the graphic this is not an assumption, it is based on polling showing most (not all) new voters are Remainers/Rejoiners.
Starmer gave an answer to Davey today on the custom union that effectively dismissed it altogether
Those wanting a custom union or to rejoin are going to need to explain how they can do this without the UK exciting the various new trade deals with the US, India and the Trans pacific partnership which actually has Canada as a member
Starmer clearly is opposed and made his point well [for Starmer that is ]
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
As I understood the graphic this is not an assumption, it is based on polling showing most (not all) new voters are Remainers/Rejoiners.
It is increasingly obvious that Starmer should be shifting further towards alignment/rejoin but instead he seems determined to chase Reform to please a section of voters who are unlikely to vote Labour.
Sir Keir will be thrilled that his cherished ideals of anglo-French co-operation will be retained after he leaves office.
*In seriousness, in the event that both Farage and Bardella are elected, minds are more than likely to change, but it's interesting nonetheless.
The Home Office and Civil Service simply won’t allow it.
I dont think towing overloaded dinghies is something that either coastguard or Royal Navy could do. Theres a very high risk of a capsize catastrophe.
Loading them onto a safe vessel and landing them back on the French coast is possible, but obviously needs French governmental support.
I wouldn’t advocate it for the reasons you outline. Whatever people think of these men and their motivations for coming here you cannot simply risk drowning them. It would be unacceptable.
I thought the Labour government told us that they were mostly women and children?
Perhaps they self-identify as women and children.
There's a long tradition of asylum seekers claiming to be children when they're not.
Specific quote of interest "Jahanzeb fled Afghanistan and underwent an age assessment after arriving in the UK in January, which concluded he was 17, Mr Williams said." But was he really 17?
Is this the case that was reported of the two Leamington spa boys committing a heinous attack on a girl ?
I used to work in Leamington and live in Kenilworth.
It used to be a nice place.
There are lots of parts of England that *used* to be a nice place. Hence, those with immediate memories kind of getting annoyed and looking for someone to put it right.
Lots of parts of Britain used to be pretty grim too. South London was in 1983, much smarter now. The Black Country was down in the dumps when I moved there in 1989 too, with closed factories everywhere as a sort of post Thatcher post industrial dystopia.
The dystopia was long before Thatcher, lets remember the Boys from the Blackstuff was a play written before she took office.
Since the Thatcher revolution, the improvements by Major and Blair with regional investment much of this was long gone. By the late 2000s (just as we went into the crash), much of what was unrecognisable squaller was gone.
Mid 2000s was peak UK. All ruined by the crash, the eastern european migration, the need for budgetary constraint following the great crash, the bandwidth taken up by Brexit, the inviting of the chancers of the earth to relocated to Europe by Merkel precipitating the refugee crisis and the boats, Covid (and the government's response) and the Boris wave.
We live in a materially worse state than we did, foreign young men shiftlessly wandering round the most provincial of towns, pestering the young women and committing petty crime, the movement of the high street to a highway of vape shops, barbers and mini markets that are openly recognised as fronts for organised crime. On that latter point that started off as a racist conspiracy is now an openly accepted fact across the political spectrum.
Any wonder people are going to vote for someone like Farge?
"Squalor", not "squaller". A squaller is something quite different!
As for the rest of your claims: balls.
I take it you live somewhere down south.
I fully recognize what @CumberlandGap is saying and equally can imagine someone in somewhere in the home counties not recognizing it.
But that’s because I live up north but spend a fair bit of time down south
More people live down south. If we are to describe the state of the nation, we can't just look at one region's experience, let alone that experience filtered through a rather loaded lens.
That's right, the people down south live, while the people up north exist.
Weighted mean has the population centred on the Daventry logistics centre (rather impressive really).
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
As I understood the graphic this is not an assumption, it is based on polling showing most (not all) new voters are Remainers/Rejoiners.
It is increasingly obvious that Starmer should be shifting further towards alignment/rejoin but instead he seems determined to chase Reform to please a section of voters who are unlikely to vote Labour.
The big story of this parliament is Labour's internal pyscho-struggle to reconcile the constituency it has with the one it thinks it ought to have
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
As I understood the graphic this is not an assumption, it is based on polling showing most (not all) new voters are Remainers/Rejoiners.
Starmer gave an answer to Davey today on the custom union that effectively dismissed it altogether
Those wanting a custom union or to rejoin are going to need to explain how they can do this without the UK exciting the various new trade deals with the US, India and the Trans pacific partnership which actually has Canada as a member
Starmer clearly is opposed and made his point well [for Starmer that is ]
To put it in an analogy? "Congratulations Mr G, we'd like to offer you a position on the board at £100k pa, but it'll mean giving up your paper round "
Glad Starmer has jumped in on this. As a human rights lawyer it's a little bit Nixon going to China. Good stuff.
Even if it fails, it sets the precedent that change is possible, and worshipping documents is bad.
It's more a case that he is still addicted to document worship but now feels the need to change the document, providing everybody else agrees first. He's not changing his mind so much as asking to be reprogrammed.
And given his apparent reverence for interpretations of the law, the evil side of me wonders what version of the ECHR *would* make Starmer go “Tilt”
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
A mixed bag of local by-elections tomorrow. Caerphilly (PC defence), Darlington (Lab), East Devon ( Ind elected as Con), Highlands (SNP), Lichfield (Con), South Kesteven x2 (Con, Ind), Stockton on Tees (Con), West Lothian (Lab). Expect some changes.
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
As I understood the graphic this is not an assumption, it is based on polling showing most (not all) new voters are Remainers/Rejoiners.
Starmer gave an answer to Davey today on the custom union that effectively dismissed it altogether
Those wanting a custom union or to rejoin are going to need to explain how they can do this without the UK exciting the various new trade deals with the US, India and the Trans pacific partnership which actually has Canada as a member
Starmer clearly is opposed and made his point well [for Starmer that is ]
To put it in an analogy? "Congratulations Mr G, we'd like to offer you a position on the board at £100k pa, but it'll mean giving up your paper round "
Good try but you do not know the cost that the EU would demand
Sir Keir will be thrilled that his cherished ideals of anglo-French co-operation will be retained after he leaves office.
*In seriousness, in the event that both Farage and Bardella are elected, minds are more than likely to change, but it's interesting nonetheless.
The Home Office and Civil Service simply won’t allow it.
I dont think towing overloaded dinghies is something that either coastguard or Royal Navy could do. Theres a very high risk of a capsize catastrophe.
Loading them onto a safe vessel and landing them back on the French coast is possible, but obviously needs French governmental support.
I wouldn’t advocate it for the reasons you outline. Whatever people think of these men and their motivations for coming here you cannot simply risk drowning them. It would be unacceptable.
I thought the Labour government told us that they were mostly women and children?
Perhaps they self-identify as women and children.
There's a long tradition of asylum seekers claiming to be children when they're not.
Specific quote of interest "Jahanzeb fled Afghanistan and underwent an age assessment after arriving in the UK in January, which concluded he was 17, Mr Williams said." But was he really 17?
Is this the case that was reported of the two Leamington spa boys committing a heinous attack on a girl ?
I used to work in Leamington and live in Kenilworth.
It used to be a nice place.
There are lots of parts of England that *used* to be a nice place. Hence, those with immediate memories kind of getting annoyed and looking for someone to put it right.
Lots of parts of Britain used to be pretty grim too. South London was in 1983, much smarter now. The Black Country was down in the dumps when I moved there in 1989 too, with closed factories everywhere as a sort of post Thatcher post industrial dystopia.
The dystopia was long before Thatcher, lets remember the Boys from the Blackstuff was a play written before she took office.
Since the Thatcher revolution, the improvements by Major and Blair with regional investment much of this was long gone. By the late 2000s (just as we went into the crash), much of what was unrecognisable squaller was gone.
Mid 2000s was peak UK. All ruined by the crash, the eastern european migration, the need for budgetary constraint following the great crash, the bandwidth taken up by Brexit, the inviting of the chancers of the earth to relocated to Europe by Merkel precipitating the refugee crisis and the boats, Covid (and the government's response) and the Boris wave.
We live in a materially worse state than we did, foreign young men shiftlessly wandering round the most provincial of towns, pestering the young women and committing petty crime, the movement of the high street to a highway of vape shops, barbers and mini markets that are openly recognised as fronts for organised crime. On that latter point that started off as a racist conspiracy is now an openly accepted fact across the political spectrum.
Any wonder people are going to vote for someone like Farge?
"Squalor", not "squaller". A squaller is something quite different!
As for the rest of your claims: balls.
I take it you live somewhere down south.
I fully recognize what @CumberlandGap is saying and equally can imagine someone in somewhere in the home counties not recognizing it.
But that’s because I live up north but spend a fair bit of time down south
More people live down south. If we are to describe the state of the nation, we can't just look at one region's experience, let alone that experience filtered through a rather loaded lens.
That's right, the people down south live, while the people up north exist.
Weighted mean has the population centred on the Daventry logistics centre (rather impressive really).
A mixed bag of local by-elections tomorrow. Caerphilly (PC defence), Darlington (Lab), East Devon ( Ind elected as Con), Highlands (SNP), Lichfield (Con), South Kesteven x2 (Con, Ind), Stockton on Tees (Con), West Lothian (Lab). Expect some changes.
Darlington should go reform, I suspect Stockton will be the same.
The Darlington one is sad, Amanda is my former GP and has long COVID
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
As I understood the graphic this is not an assumption, it is based on polling showing most (not all) new voters are Remainers/Rejoiners.
It is increasingly obvious that Starmer should be shifting further towards alignment/rejoin but instead he seems determined to chase Reform to please a section of voters who are unlikely to vote Labour.
The big story of this parliament is Labour's internal pyscho-struggle to reconcile the constituency it has with the one it thinks it ought to have
It could be argued that that was true of the Tories in the last Parliament, too.
My prediciton that the Tories will end up as the main beneficiaries of negative polarisation against Reform is looking good.
We’re a long way off that kind of result yet (Labour can still mount some recovery) but things get very interesting if the pensioner and middle class vote drifts back to the Tories, the WWC vote sticks with Reform, and the metropolitan young liberal vote goes to the Greens.
That turns into a big squeeze on the Labour vote that could be catastrophic for them. Again, not saying this is likely, but it is at least plausible.
Very small shifts in voting intention mean very big shifts in terms of seats.
If we assume that the right wing bloc of voters remains at 49% or so, then 22-23% leaves the Conservatives very much in the game. 19-21% sees them largely obliterated.
A marginal constituency is the equivalent of a swing state in US terms, but insted of only seven or so there are dozens of them.
I think it would be fair to say there are about 400 to 500 marginals, if not more.
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
QED! It's a done deal Sir Keir. Wonderful graph. Leaving was a last wish for the old folk many who have died. It's now a project for the young and progressives. If you want to win in '29 grasp the nettle
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
As I understood the graphic this is not an assumption, it is based on polling showing most (not all) new voters are Remainers/Rejoiners.
Starmer gave an answer to Davey today on the custom union that effectively dismissed it altogether
Those wanting a custom union or to rejoin are going to need to explain how they can do this without the UK exciting the various new trade deals with the US, India and the Trans pacific partnership which actually has Canada as a member
Starmer clearly is opposed and made his point well [for Starmer that is ]
The rumours of major setbacks to the Russian operations are continuing to grow. It seems that Pokrovsk, far from being a Russian victory has been an utter bloodbath for them and the Ukrainians still have a foothold in the city. Meanwhile the Russians are facing continual degradation of capabilities and logistics that are forcing very unpleasant choices and may lead to the collapse of the Crimean perimeter.
As always Trump's grip on reality in Ukraine may as fake as everything else he says.
It's really hard to know what's going on in Pokrovsk. We won't know who has had the worst of the battle until some time afterwards.
I have seen exactly the same videos, just with different watermarks, on Reddit and Telegram being marketed as FPV strikes on Ukrainian or Russian forces depending on the platform.
Both sides are running relentless propaganda campaigns operated by pathological liars so who knows what the fuck is going on.
The only knowable fact at this point is that Trump has had e-fucking-nough of it. The SMO is degrading Russian military capabilities (yet also simultaneously improving it doctrinally and technologically) but that's not worth the $130bn (or whatever) that the US has pumped into a losing cause.
Well we know that Ukraine are still in the city, and Russia claim they aren't.
As far as Trump is concerned, his opinion should no longer matter. Without skin in the game, he has .. no cards.
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
QED! It's a done deal Sir Keir. Wonderful graph. Leaving was a last wish for the old folk many who have died. It's now a project for the young and progressives. If you want to win in '29 grasp the nettle
It's really not that simple, by far the best post-Brexit polling on the issue was done by that Tony Blair thinktank, even Remainers opposed rejoining if it meant the four freedoms would apply. The EU that people hypothetically wish to rejoin doesn't exist. I wish we could see where people really draw the line, my hunch is that most people support closer links, but not full EU membership in practice.
Frankly though EU membership isn't even close to the top of the pile of what we need to sort out. How does NATO function without the US in it, which looks increasingly likely, and the need for a wider defence alliance of democracies to support countries like Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, those are the things where our diplomats should be busiest.
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
QED! It's a done deal Sir Keir. Wonderful graph. Leaving was a last wish for the old folk many who have died. It's now a project for the young and progressives. If you want to win in '29 grasp the nettle
Malak al-Maut is putting in shift reaping the souls of leavers and they've stopped making new leavers but it's going to take another 10-15 years before the demographics overwhelm inertia and intransigence.
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
As I understood the graphic this is not an assumption, it is based on polling showing most (not all) new voters are Remainers/Rejoiners.
It is increasingly obvious that Starmer should be shifting further towards alignment/rejoin but instead he seems determined to chase Reform to please a section of voters who are unlikely to vote Labour.
The big story of this parliament is Labour's internal pyscho-struggle to reconcile the constituency it has with the one it thinks it ought to have
I don't disagree completely but a more positive spin is that the party is trying to reach beyond its base to build an election-winning coalition. Admittedly not with much success currently. I think Labour will embrace rejoin but not for a while, it will wait until the country is clamouring for it. Another decade maybe.
Completely off topic, but an illustration of how "events" can affect politics. We are having heavy rain, relatively warm temperatures*, and gusts of wind. So far no deaths, but extensive flooding in Washington state, west of the Cascade range.
Some schools in rural areas are opening late, or even not opening at all. The usual suspects are ignoring the usual advice not to drive through standing water, but so far no deaths. And, for which I am thankful, so far no extensive power outages.
Elected officials will be judged by how well they respond to these "events".
* The precip is mostly rain and melts the snow at higher elevations. It is currently 56 degrees F where I am, so even at much higher elevations there is rain instead fo snow.
He’s an accomplished speaker in a small group situation: naturally loud voice, articulate, reasonably on top of his brief. I think it’s a mistake to lump all Reform people together as knuckle-heads - he has a brain. Not a brain that thinks the same way as mine, but a brain nonetheless.
Ideologically and stylistically he’s very much a Redwoodite Tory. The conversation could easily have been with someone on the right of the Tory party any time in the last 30 years. Deregulation, let’s get business people into government, cutting waste, common sense etc etc. The wrinkle vis a vis most Thatcherite types is a greater attachment to national champions, government intervention in the ownership of public utilities, and PPP. And of course a very clear enmity towards net zero and all things renewable, which is now mainstream conservative ideology but didn’t used to be.
To my question on corporation tax, he said they couldn’t make firm policy thus far out from an election but he praised Osborne’s tax roadmap.
He steered well away from anything culture war related, apart from a lone scoffing reference to “woke” investment funds. Nor foreign affairs. Clearly not his lane.
A clear indication that they would do “what they do in the USA” (he actually said that) and create a partisan civil service with Perm secs and their staff appointed by the government.
This was, in essence, like watching an hour of Dominic Cummings. Or indeed @Luckyguy1983 of this parish with a dollop of @Casino_Royale .
Of course this is your partisan, centrist, take on it.
I hate him already!
You’ve never met me, Roger.
I think I was talking about Tice! Your description added to Onlylivingboy's paints the rather gruesome picture of the person I imagined shacking up with Lucretia Borgia in Dubai
Starmer just comprehensively demonstrated why a customs union or rejoining the single market is not a practical proposition following the trade deals with India, US and the pharmaceutical deal with US
This is a question the Lib Dems will have to find answers to if they are to persuade a change in policy by labour
The answer, if it gets that far, would be that deepening trade with the EU would generate enough benefits that it will be worth ditching the other deals for. See also the Pacific thing.
I don't think that's where the conversation is today, and it might never get there. But if it does, that's your answer.
Meanwhile, in Beautiful Swirly Diagram news, here's the latest from Lord Peter of Kellnershire;
There are many reasons why that doesn't mean Rejoin Now. But as long as the defining thing of recent Britain remains immovable and unpopular, it's going to continue to stink out the national conversation.
That's the outlook for a fair bit longer yet.
Supports my theory that a number of PBers are, in fact, ghosts.
In all seriousness, it's an astonishing change. This is what many naive Indy supporters would happen in Scotland - but it's actually happened for Brexit.
As someone pointed out above, it would be even more pronounced if it didn't take into account differential turnout by age.
Is the assumption that all new voters are remain a sound one? I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
As I understood the graphic this is not an assumption, it is based on polling showing most (not all) new voters are Remainers/Rejoiners.
It is increasingly obvious that Starmer should be shifting further towards alignment/rejoin but instead he seems determined to chase Reform to please a section of voters who are unlikely to vote Labour.
The big story of this parliament is Labour's internal pyscho-struggle to reconcile the constituency it has with the one it thinks it ought to have
I don't disagree completely but a more positive spin is that the party is trying to reach beyond its base to build an election-winning coalition. Admittedly not with much success currently. I think Labour will embrace rejoin but not for a while, it will wait until the country is clamouring for it. Another decade maybe.
How do they coalesce younger, university educated, pro-EU supporters with older anti-migrant, anti-EU, working class pensioners? It worked when that demographic were still working, unionised and still favoured a collective social contract, but I don't think that exists anymore.
He’s an accomplished speaker in a small group situation: naturally loud voice, articulate, reasonably on top of his brief. I think it’s a mistake to lump all Reform people together as knuckle-heads - he has a brain. Not a brain that thinks the same way as mine, but a brain nonetheless.
Ideologically and stylistically he’s very much a Redwoodite Tory. The conversation could easily have been with someone on the right of the Tory party any time in the last 30 years. Deregulation, let’s get business people into government, cutting waste, common sense etc etc. The wrinkle vis a vis most Thatcherite types is a greater attachment to national champions, government intervention in the ownership of public utilities, and PPP. And of course a very clear enmity towards net zero and all things renewable, which is now mainstream conservative ideology but didn’t used to be.
To my question on corporation tax, he said they couldn’t make firm policy thus far out from an election but he praised Osborne’s tax roadmap.
He steered well away from anything culture war related, apart from a lone scoffing reference to “woke” investment funds. Nor foreign affairs. Clearly not his lane.
A clear indication that they would do “what they do in the USA” (he actually said that) and create a partisan civil service with Perm secs and their staff appointed by the government.
This was, in essence, like watching an hour of Dominic Cummings. Or indeed @Luckyguy1983 of this parish with a dollop of @Casino_Royale .
I await my invite.
I haven't heard Tice speak, but as a media performer I always think he's got good assets - business background, good speaking voice, telegenic, but in the event always comes over as a bit less than the sum of his parts. He tails off a bit - loses ones' interest a tad over the course of speaking. Perhaps the reason for it is that he prefers to speak off the cuff, rather then deliver a rehearsed speech. Rehearsed speeches with rises and falls in all the right places work better for some people - not everyone has Farage's gift for speaking off the cuff just right. I agree he's still good and as you mention Tim, I agree with most of what he says.
The World Cup in 2026 is going to be a fiasco isn't it? No-one is going to turn up. I see the latest proposal is that all visitors must provide social media, email addresses going back 5 years and details of all your relatives.
Good luck with interpreting the dialogue of the average Glaswegian visiting the World Cup.
What does "details of all your relatives" mean?
What do you think ?
When I applied for a job at BAE Systems over a decade ago I had to provide that.
Are the Lib Dems proposing “a” customs union or “the” Customs Union.
Doesn’t sound like they’ve given any of this much thought.
I'm not sure what the Lib Dems are for anymore other than performing cunnilingus on the EU.
It seems to be all they're interested in.
So you mean, apart from electoral reform, major constitutional reform, the role of the Royal family, and including more powerful local government and codifying the relationship between England and the rest of the UK, rebuilding the relationship with the EU and rejoining the single market, protecting civil liberties, reform of the NHS, including expanding medical training, much more active anti pollution measures, including net zero by 2045, major reform of welfare, improving the funding of the courts, expanding the early years pupil premium, take much more aggressive action to seize Russian assets to defend Ukraine, and expanding sanctions against the Iranian revolutionary guard and expanding our armed forces back above 100,000?
You are still asking what have the Liberal Democrats ever done for us?
I think you should be asking a similar question to the government and the Tories, honestly, for the Tories in particular have very few answers.
Are the Lib Dems proposing “a” customs union or “the” Customs Union.
Doesn’t sound like they’ve given any of this much thought.
I'm not sure what the Lib Dems are for anymore other than performing cunnilingus on the EU.
It seems to be all they're interested in.
So you mean, apart from electoral reform, major constitutional reform, the role of the Royal family, and including more powerful local government and codifying the relationship between England and the rest of the UK, rebuilding the relationship with the EU and rejoining the single market, protecting civil liberties, reform of the NHS, including expanding medical training, much more active anti pollution measures, including net zero by 2045, major reform of welfare, improving the funding of the courts, expanding the early years pupil premium, take much more aggressive action to seize Russian assets to defend Ukraine, and expanding sanctions against the Iranian revolutionary guard and expanding our armed forces back above 100,000?
You are still asking what have the Liberal Democrats ever done for us?
I think you should be asking a similar question to the government and the Tories, honestly, for the Tories in particular have very few answers.
No likes....
What is true may not be popular.What is popular may not be true.
Comments
(But also the people who live in south Scotland and south Wales count towards the South!)
The Reform leader of Worcestershire County Council has sent the chairman of Worcester Labour Party a legal threat - demanding he stops mentioning her name in public.
Worcester city councillor Ed Kimberley has also been told he faces action if he publishes or shares any more "videos, posts or commentary" about Reform UK.
It follows a series of videos posted online by Kimberley in which he denounced right wing extremism and called Reform "the nasty party".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn09w1kldjno
Britain aligns with some of Europe’s hardline governments in calling for change to allow Rwanda-style migration deals"
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/dec/10/uk-joins-call-for-europes-human-rights-laws-to-be-constrained
Even if it fails, it sets the precedent that change is possible, and worshipping documents is bad.
That turns into a big squeeze on the Labour vote that could be catastrophic for them. Again, not saying this is likely, but it is at least plausible.
I know that leave had positive correlations with age, BMI, Christianity, homeownership w/o mortgage and negative correlations with education and employment. But I don't think it's correct to put 100% of a group in one camp.
https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2019/03/a-reminder-of-how-britain-voted-in-the-eu-referendum-and-why/
Breaking: A federal judge blocked President Trump’s deployment of National Guard troops to Los Angeles and ordered them returned to the control of the state’s governor.
“The founders designed our government to be a system of checks and balances. Defendants, however, make clear that the only check they want is a blank one,” US District Court Judge Breyer said.
https://x.com/jimsciutto/status/1998784572775932031?s=20
I am convinced Farage will not be PM in 2029
If we assume that the right wing bloc of voters remains at 49% or so, then 22-23% leaves the Conservatives very much in the game. 19-21% sees them largely obliterated.
As far as Trump is concerned, his opinion should no longer matter.
Without skin in the game, he has .. no cards.
Those wanting a custom union or to rejoin are going to need to explain how they can do this without the UK exciting the various new trade deals with the US, India and the Trans pacific partnership which actually has Canada as a member
Starmer clearly is opposed and made his point well [for Starmer that is ]
"Congratulations Mr G, we'd like to offer you a position on the board at £100k pa, but it'll mean giving up your paper round "
3% seems to be the proportion that can generally relied upon to give completely bonkers answers.
The Darlington one is sad, Amanda is my former GP and has long COVID
NEW THREAD
NATO is a Cold War relic. The United States should withdraw from NATO and use that money to defend our country, not socialist countries.
Today, I introduced HR 6508 to end our NATO membership.
https://x.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1998526052243746978
Frankly though EU membership isn't even close to the top of the pile of what we need to sort out. How does NATO function without the US in it, which looks increasingly likely, and the need for a wider defence alliance of democracies to support countries like Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, those are the things where our diplomats should be busiest.
I think Labour will embrace rejoin but not for a while, it will wait until the country is clamouring for it. Another decade maybe.
Some schools in rural areas are opening late, or even not opening at all. The usual suspects are ignoring the usual advice not to drive through standing water, but so far no deaths. And, for which I am thankful, so far no extensive power outages.
Elected officials will be judged by how well they respond to these "events".
Would the "Extinction Rebellion" folks like this video? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q4Y_BaGZkg It seems likely, but I know little about the group.
* The precip is mostly rain and melts the snow at higher elevations. It is currently 56 degrees F where I am, so even at much higher elevations there is rain instead fo snow.
It worked when that demographic were still working, unionised and still favoured a collective social contract, but I don't think that exists anymore.
When I applied for a job at BAE Systems over a decade ago I had to provide that.