On Topic - Mike, I'm a big fan of this site, but this is a horrible rumor (that's already been debunked) from a pretty dark place on the internet that very few people take seriously outside the Alt-right fringe. PB shouldn't be spreading this kind of rubbish. Poor form.
On Topic - Mike, I'm a big fan of this site, but this is a horrible rumor (that's already been debunked) from a pretty dark place on the internet that very few people take seriously outside the Alt-right fringe. PB shouldn't be spreading this kind of rubbish. Poor form.
If this is a smear, then it makes it clear that Pete's one they very worried about.
On Topic - Mike, I'm a big fan of this site, but this is a horrible rumor (that's already been debunked) from a pretty dark place on the internet that very few people take seriously outside the Alt-right fringe. PB shouldn't be spreading this kind of rubbish. Poor form.
Agreed. Best to wait for journalists to do due diligence rather than risk spreading fake news.
Is this a good time to mention Mike's booked a holiday in early June?
Nailed on then :-)
May and June is when I start my new job AND when I'm attending lots of world cup matches, and hopefully a Liverpool v Ajax or Spurs champions league final.
I would like a quite period in politics.
Well quiet.
Ducking autocorrect.
The best way to understand autocorrect is to think of it as a helpful elf in your phone correcting your errors who is in fact quite drunk.
Or the bastard offspring of Marcel Duchamp and Mrs Malaprop.
"We made an unsafe plane, but it wasn't our fault they crashed, guv."
A fish rots from the head...
Indeed, It seems Boeing are really keen to blame the pilots (in particular for lack of training). I wonder why?
It also ignores that, for the first accident at least, the pilots could not react in a proper way because no-one knew about the system that had caused the problem - and the preceding flight only survived because a third pilot guessed. And there are debates about whether the instructions the pilots of the second flight had were comprehensive or even correct.
But despite wanting to blame the pilots, Boeing don't want them to have more training: they've created a simple 15-minute computer-based training program instead of time in the simulator - perhaps because Boeing hasn't built enough such simulators for the Max.
The whole thing stinks.
There's been a very strong blame-the-pilots and it-wouldn't-happen-to-well-trained-us-pilots memes going on t'Internet. I really hope it doesn't turn out that any of these trolls are paid for by Boeing ...
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
On topic: If Hunter Kelly has a genuine allegation to make, this seems a very odd way to make it.
A Google for Hunter Kelly doesn't show up any sign of existence prior to these allegations: no LinkedIn or Facebook page, for example.
My reading from this is that Pete Buttigieg is likely guilty of multiple sexual assaults and deliberately put this fake assault story out, so as to discredit the hundreds of genuine accusations that will come out.
That’s an incredibly high risk strategy, if true.
One very well known fraudster did something similar - though related to his financial dealings. And it worked, for a surprisingly long time.
I'm sorry, I was making a gag. I don't for a second think him guilty*, I'm just using the warped logic of cognitive dissonance at its finest.
* Unless evidence appears, of course
A perfect illustration of how repeating smears is damaging, irrespective of their credibility.
The immediate evidence tends to suggest that this is a Swift Boat style operation.
"We made an unsafe plane, but it wasn't our fault they crashed, guv."
A fish rots from the head...
Indeed, It seems Boeing are really keen to blame the pilots (in particular for lack of training). I wonder why?
It also ignores that, for the first accident at least, the pilots could not react in a proper way because no-one knew about the system that had caused the problem - and the preceding flight only survived because a third pilot guessed. And there are debates about whether the instructions the pilots of the second flight had were comprehensive or even correct.
But despite wanting to blame the pilots, Boeing don't want them to have more training: they've created a simple 15-minute computer-based training program instead of time in the simulator - perhaps because Boeing hasn't built enough such simulators for the Max.
The whole thing stinks.
There's been a very strong blame-the-pilots and it-wouldn't-happen-to-well-trained-us-pilots memes going on t'Internet. I really hope it doesn't turn out that any of these trolls are paid for by Boeing ...
They specifically marketed the cost advantage to airlines of the plane not requiring retraining for pilots already qualified on previous versions of the 737.
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
May's permabackstop & Corbyn s fantasy customs Union look much the same to me
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
The only balanced - and hence achievable - deals are those that outrage both parts of both parties equally. This means either a full permanent Customs Union with no referendum or something close to May’s deal with a People’s Vote. The former probably outrages Labour more and the latter the Tories more, hence some additional tweaks (weights) would be needed.
Given that the damage to both parties from a breakdown is much less - provided the blame can be equally carried - suggests you are right a deal doesn’t look likely.
"We made an unsafe plane, but it wasn't our fault they crashed, guv."
A fish rots from the head...
Indeed, It seems Boeing are really keen to blame the pilots (in particular for lack of training). I wonder why?
It also ignores that, for the first accident at least, the pilots could not react in a proper way because no-one knew about the system that had caused the problem - and the preceding flight only survived because a third pilot guessed. And there are debates about whether the instructions the pilots of the second flight had were comprehensive or even correct.
But despite wanting to blame the pilots, Boeing don't want them to have more training: they've created a simple 15-minute computer-based training program instead of time in the simulator - perhaps because Boeing hasn't built enough such simulators for the Max.
The whole thing stinks.
There's been a very strong blame-the-pilots and it-wouldn't-happen-to-well-trained-us-pilots memes going on t'Internet. I really hope it doesn't turn out that any of these trolls are paid for by Boeing ...
They specifically marketed the cost advantage to airlines of the plane not requiring retraining for pilots already qualified on previous versions of the 737.
If I were Boeing, I would be sweating buckets over this. If they do a half arsed job on fixing the 737 Max, when the next one crashes, the company crashes with it.
Jacob Wohl, the far-right sh*thead whose odiousness is only matched by his stupidity and incompetence, appears to have been caught in yet another botched attempt to smear someone. His latest target? Pete Buttigieg.
Many eyebrows were raised on Monday when a post from someone named Hunter Kelly appeared on Medium. In the post, Kelly accused Buttigieg of having sexually assaulted. It was Kelly’s only post on Medium, and his accompanying Twitter feed was similarly sparse, having been created just this month. Virtually no mainstream news outlets touched the story, which was probably a good idea. On Monday night, the Daily Beast revealed that Wohl has allegedly been going around trying to gin up false accusations against Buttigieg.
On topic: If Hunter Kelly has a genuine allegation to make, this seems a very odd way to make it.
A Google for Hunter Kelly doesn't show up any sign of existence prior to these allegations: no LinkedIn or Facebook page, for example.
My reading from this is that Pete Buttigieg is likely guilty of multiple sexual assaults and deliberately put this fake assault story out, so as to discredit the hundreds of genuine accusations that will come out.
"We made an unsafe plane, but it wasn't our fault they crashed, guv."
A fish rots from the head...
Indeed, It seems Boeing are really keen to blame the pilots (in particular for lack of training). I wonder why?
It also ignores that, for the first accident at least, the pilots could not react in a proper way because no-one knew about the system that had caused the problem - and the preceding flight only survived because a third pilot guessed. And there are debates about whether the instructions the pilots of the second flight had were comprehensive or even correct.
But despite wanting to blame the pilots, Boeing don't want them to have more training: they've created a simple 15-minute computer-based training program instead of time in the simulator - perhaps because Boeing hasn't built enough such simulators for the Max.
The whole thing stinks.
There's been a very strong blame-the-pilots and it-wouldn't-happen-to-well-trained-us-pilots memes going on t'Internet. I really hope it doesn't turn out that any of these trolls are paid for by Boeing ...
They specifically marketed the cost advantage to airlines of the plane not requiring retraining for pilots already qualified on previous versions of the 737.
If I were Boeing, I would be sweating buckets over this. If they do a half arsed job on fixing the 737 Max, when the next one crashes, the company crashes with it.
Boeing won't crash, because it's in no-one's interests for it to crash. The airlines have only two significant choices for the sort of jets: Boeing or Airbus - the competitors are all minnows in comparison. Airbus cannot up their construction rate enough to compensate for any 737 Max cancellations - they have a massive backlog of orders already, and this is why we haven't seen major 737 Max cancellations. The US government certainly don't want Boeing to fail.
The worst that could happen is a reorganisation ala ULA in rocketry, when Lockheed Martin and Boeing's rocket interests were merged after Boeing were caught cheating on a contract. But the US military would hate that.
About the only people who would want Boeing to fail are the people making, or hoping to make, competitor aircraft, such as the Chinese and Russians. Expect their regulators to go through the new code with a fine-tooth comb. And they won't have to do a binary conversion as they probably already have the source code...
"We made an unsafe plane, but it wasn't our fault they crashed, guv."
A fish rots from the head...
Indeed, It seems Boeing are really keen to blame the pilots (in particular for lack of training). I wonder why?
It also ignores that, for the first accident at least, the pilots could not react in a proper way because no-one knew about the system that had caused the problem - and the preceding flight only survived because a third pilot guessed. And there are debates about whether the instructions the pilots of the second flight had were comprehensive or even correct.
But despite wanting to blame the pilots, Boeing don't want them to have more training: they've created a simple 15-minute computer-based training program instead of time in the simulator - perhaps because Boeing hasn't built enough such simulators for the Max.
The whole thing stinks.
There's been a very strong blame-the-pilots and it-wouldn't-happen-to-well-trained-us-pilots memes going on t'Internet. I really hope it doesn't turn out that any of these trolls are paid for by Boeing ...
They risk undermining their entire brand. And they have made some very good planes in the past.
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
No.
Personally, I don’t see any advantage in this for Labour other than to be seen to be trying.
Maybe if they get a very soft Brexit that splits the Tories further they’d go for it and then the next Labour leader would try and take us back in.
"We made an unsafe plane, but it wasn't our fault they crashed, guv."
A fish rots from the head...
Indeed, It seems Boeing are really keen to blame the pilots (in particular for lack of training). I wonder why?
It also ignores that, for the first accident at least, the pilots could not react in a proper way because no-one knew about the system that had caused the problem - and the preceding flight only survived because a third pilot guessed. And there are debates about whether the instructions the pilots of the second flight had were comprehensive or even correct.
But despite wanting to blame the pilots, Boeing don't want them to have more training: they've created a simple 15-minute computer-based training program instead of time in the simulator - perhaps because Boeing hasn't built enough such simulators for the Max.
The whole thing stinks.
There's been a very strong blame-the-pilots and it-wouldn't-happen-to-well-trained-us-pilots memes going on t'Internet. I really hope it doesn't turn out that any of these trolls are paid for by Boeing ...
They
If I were Boeing, I would be sweating buckets over this. If they do a half arsed job on fixing the 737 Max, when the next one crashes, the company crashes with it.
Boeing won't crash, because it's in no-one's interests for it to crash. The airlines have only two significant choices for the sort of jets: Boeing or Airbus - the competitors are all minnows in comparison. Airbus cannot up their construction rate enough to compensate for any 737 Max cancellations - they have a massive backlog of orders already, and this is why we haven't seen major 737 Max cancellations. The US government certainly don't want Boeing to fail.
The worst that could happen is a reorganisation ala ULA in rocketry, when Lockheed Martin and Boeing's rocket interests were merged after Boeing were caught cheating on a contract. But the US military would hate that.
About the only people who would want Boeing to fail are the people making, or hoping to make, competitor aircraft, such as the Chinese and Russians. Expect their regulators to go through the new code with a fine-tooth comb. And they won't have to do a binary conversion as they probably already have the source code...
As bad as Boeing might be I’d poke out my right eye before I boarded a Russian or Chinese built passenger aircraft.
Technically she can survive even if she loses but hard to see her lasting much longer
She had intended to have already announced she was standing down as PM by now, her not having much time left is not that big a deal. That we are no closer to any resolution is a bigger deal- seemingly the only thing Tories care about is they are going to get smashed in the locals, and that's not even unusual 9 years in to government. That half their members are salivating over nigel Farage is I grant more troubling for them.
I thought it was 🐶 💩 personally. They’ve given up storytelling for spectacle.
GoT has through 8 series alternated between spectacle, OMG "moments" and entire tedious episodes where the pieces just move around the board.
The first two episodes of series 8 moved the pieces around the board. Episode 3 was most certaintly a monumental mix of spectacle and OMG "moments".
Quite. It is pretty absurd to suggest they have given up on storytelling based on a climactic episode which followed 2 episodes of character development and set up. The story is told over more than one episode for crying out loud, and I'm not even as keen on the episode as many.
If this is a spontaneous grass roots revolt I'm a Dutchman.
Key line: "Though the EGM vote is not binding, losing it would be Mrs May’s deepest humiliation yet and spark overwhelming pressure on her to stand down immediately."
(As an aside, surprised that there hasn't been another time when 10% of Tory constituency chairmen haven't wanted to do this over something?)
Although slightly lost on those of us who missed series 1 - 7.
Well - sort your life out and watch it :-)
This post does not contain spoilers.
Isn't all you need to know is there are lots of tits and dragons?
That sounds dull.
There were also stabbings.
In all seriousness if people arent enamoured of fantasy worldbuilding, as I am, then they might not make it in long enough to look past superficial thirty stuff early on, or fall in love with the depth of characterisation. Books and show are to my mind often described by its own fans such a way as to make it seen less good than they are, eg by going on about how dark and brutal it is as though a selling point in it's own right.
If this is a spontaneous grass roots revolt I'm a Dutchman.
Key line: "Though the EGM vote is not binding, losing it would be Mrs May’s deepest humiliation yet and spark overwhelming pressure on her to stand down immediately."
(As an aside, surprised that there hasn't been another time when 10% of Tory constituency chairmen haven't wanted to do this over something?)
If this is a spontaneous grass roots revolt I'm a Dutchman.
Key line: "Though the EGM vote is not binding, losing it would be Mrs May’s deepest humiliation yet and spark overwhelming pressure on her to stand down immediately."
(As an aside, surprised that there hasn't been another time when 10% of Tory constituency chairmen haven't wanted to do this over something?)
No doubt there has been a time when 10% of Tory constituency chairs have wanted something or other. But they would have to all be in regular contact with all the others to co-ordinate a response. How would that happen? How has it happened now?
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
No. I can imagine one which theoretically could be supported by a majority of the commons but because so many in each party would be apoplectic that it couldn't make it to the chamber - why as leader back it that far when neither could guarantee the other side can deliver the votes on their end? Why give in when it still might not get the one thing you want.
But I will confess to being amazed they are supposedly still talking. Either they are a lot more genuine in the intention for the talks than I thought, or perhaps its just Labour can see talking with them is destroying the Tories and the Gov is desperate .
I still don't understand what is taking so long even if it is genuine that progress is being made.
Although slightly lost on those of us who missed series 1 - 7.
Well - sort your life out and watch it :-)
This post does not contain spoilers.
Isn't all you need to know is there are lots of tits and dragons?
That sounds dull.
There were also stabbings.
In all seriousness if people arent enamoured of fantasy worldbuilding, as I am, then they might not make it in long enough to look past superficial thirty stuff early on, or fall in love with the depth of characterisation. Books and show are to my mind often described by its own fans such a way as to make it seen less good than they are, eg by going on about how dark and brutal it is as though a selling point in it's own right.
Hmm. Odd autocorrect there. Clearly I meant titty not thirty
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
Given that the damage to both parties from a breakdown is much less - provided the blame can be equally carried - suggests you are right a deal doesn’t look likely.
Pretty depressing that once more the easiest route is can kicking and partisanship, as it has been all along.
I get the feeling that he might already have touched the ceiling to his support, especially with Warren competing for his natural support on the left of the party and communicating rather better.
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
No. I can imagine one which theoretically could be supported by a majority of the commons but because so many in each party would be apoplectic that it couldn't make it to the chamber - why as leader back it that far when neither could guarantee the other side can deliver the votes on their end? Why give in when it still might not get the one thing you want.
But I will confess to being amazed they are supposedly still talking. Either they are a lot more genuine in the intention for the talks than I thought, or perhaps its just Labour can see talking with them is destroying the Tories and the Gov is desperate .
I still don't understand what is taking so long even if it is genuine that progress is being made.
Of course any deal will outrage large parts of both parties. That is in the nature of the issue. EU membership does not fit the standard party spectrum. In this it is like historic 'moral' issues like gay rights, divorce, abortion etc; but because it is THE political issue it is harder to treat it as being away from political party lines. A decent parallel is Scottish independence, where support for the political principal can come from any part of the spectrum in principle. It is not a left v right matter. Harold Wilson faced the same problem - and curiously his answer was a referendum. Whatever happened to that solid and sensible way out of all our difficulties. If politics was a sport one might say that at the moment we are trying to play tennis on an ice hockey pitch.
If this is a spontaneous grass roots revolt I'm a Dutchman.
Key line: "Though the EGM vote is not binding, losing it would be Mrs May’s deepest humiliation yet and spark overwhelming pressure on her to stand down immediately."
(As an aside, surprised that there hasn't been another time when 10% of Tory constituency chairmen haven't wanted to do this over something?)
In 1870, there was a move to oust Disraeli, but it failed.
In 1911, they did almost achieve a national vote on the leadership but Balfour resigned before any vote could take place.
In 1923, one of the decisive factors in choosing Baldwin over Curzon was the huge number of constituency chairmen who contacted the Party warning there would be rebellion if Curzon was chosen.
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
Yes by them fearing losing their seats to a party riding high in the polls if they don’t. The same could have been said if No Deal was genuinely the default option.
The reason I enjoyed GOT is that it subverted the meme. Er … whatever that means.
The goodies got killed and not always nicely. The baddies often thrived. And there was an excellent of display of tits.
Not exactly Mark Kermode analysis but that does it.
GOT is absolutely bog standard in terms of fantasy fiction. It subverts nothing Jon Snow.
A teenage protagonist of mysterious parentage who's plot twist book readers had worked out about 5 pages into the first book. All the standard tropes are happily followed.
Pete's price is heading out due to BIDEN's polling surge on entering the race. So is everyone else's.
Game of Thrones Ep 2 of this season was better than Ep 3
Except that he was for a time clear of the pack chasing the two front runners.
In any event, we should get some idea within a week if Biden’s announcement bounce is temporary.
Still betting against Trump getting the nomination ?
I closed that position some time back (at a loss). The odds have moved a lot since, but not enough yet to be tempting. Keeping an eye on it, though.
Yes, I have only a modest book on POTUS as it is such a ridiculously crowded field. I have a few punts on outsiders, as I cannot see Sanders or Biden going the distance.
I get the feeling that he might already have touched the ceiling to his support, especially with Warren competing for his natural support on the left of the party and communicating rather better.
He not a member of the Democrats, is he? Like Corbyn et al he’s a parasite wasp which will destroy the host species. The host species puts up with it leading to its destruction.
I get the feeling that he might already have touched the ceiling to his support, especially with Warren competing for his natural support on the left of the party and communicating rather better.
Sanders will likely bear Warren in Iowa and New Hampshire and when he does her supporters will go to him
Yes, but doesn't the Brexit Party favour Non EU migrants from the Commonwealth like those in Oldham?
Yes they are campaigning for the rights of those from the Indian subcontinent to come to the UK. And looking at recent immigration figures they are having some success.
It must cheer the heart of former Kippers everywhere.
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
Yes by them fearing losing their seats to a party riding high in the polls if they don’t. The same could have been said if No Deal was genuinely the default option.
That implies a very soft Brexit if such a compromise is to be reached. Labour voters are mostly Remain supporters so Labour seats are much less at risk than Conservative seats from the pitchfork-wielders. Indeed, the bigger threat to Labour would probably be striking a deal that upset Remain supporters too much.
So if Conservatives feared the Brexit party, they should be desperate to do any deal while Labour should be holding out for the mildest, lowest fat version of Brexit possible.
The reason I enjoyed GOT is that it subverted the meme. Er … whatever that means.
The goodies got killed and not always nicely. The baddies often thrived. And there was an excellent of display of tits.
Not exactly Mark Kermode analysis but that does it.
GOT is absolutely bog standard in terms of fantasy fiction. It subverts nothing Jon Snow.
A teenage protagonist of mysterious parentage who's plot twist book readers had worked out about 5 pages into the first book. All the standard tropes are happily followed.
I'm looking right now at my collection of hundreds of fantasy novels and GoT is not bog standard by any means compared to the majority of that collection.
It is the case, however, that it is not as subversive as people think and I like that. The story deconstructed so many of the standard tropes but, and people forget this, it reconstructed them anew in a way that worked. It also, a few areas aside, pulled off a dark, bloody tone without provoking darkness induced apathy, without eliminating humour or any characters one could genuinely like as many lesser imitators did.
GoT has great characters, superb world building and for the most part makes its cliches- and cliches exist for a reason- work. In my opinion people playing up its subversiveness miss the point, but that's just me.
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
The only balanced - and hence achievable - deals are those that outrage both parts of both parties equally. This means either a full permanent Customs Union with no referendum or something close to May’s deal with a People’s Vote. The former probably outrages Labour more and the latter the Tories more, hence some additional tweaks (weights) would be needed.
Given that the damage to both parties from a breakdown is much less - provided the blame can be equally carried - suggests you are right a deal doesn’t look likely.
Deal plus Customs Union without a referendum was only 3 votes from a majority in the indicative votes, most Labour MPs voted for it and it was the third most popular option amongst Tory MPs after May's Deal and No Deal
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
Yes by them fearing losing their seats to a party riding high in the polls if they don’t. The same could have been said if No Deal was genuinely the default option.
That implies a very soft Brexit if such a compromise is to be reached. Labour voters are mostly Remain supporters so Labour seats are much less at risk than Conservative seats from the pitchfork-wielders. Indeed, the bigger threat to Labour would probably be striking a deal that upset Remain supporters too much.
So if Conservatives feared the Brexit party, they should be desperate to do any deal while Labour should be holding out for the mildest, lowest fat version of Brexit possible.
Everyone needs some discipline to succeed, and default No Deal was a strict teacher that kept the children we have as MPs in line. Yvette Cooper has basically got the teacher suspended by accusing him of being a paedo and now the kids do what they want, which turns out to be anything rather than what they were supposed to be doing.
I was going to say something about brexit going quiet and wondering whether we were just going to coast to another crisis in October.
But I take the point being made that everyone’s staying quiet during the local elex campaign. So my question is what happens on Friday? Does an expected* Tory drubbing:
(a) encourage Tories behind the Deal to avoid EU elex? (b) harden other parties against it because they want more electoral fun in three weeks? (c) hasten TM’s departure and scatter the deck completely?
(*while I accept there’ll be a spin operation - “everyone said we’d lose 1000 seats and it was less than 950” - I can’t see a situation where Thursday looks like a good outcome for Tories. Or probably most other parties, the voting system, democracy in general etc)
The reason I enjoyed GOT is that it subverted the meme. Er … whatever that means.
The goodies got killed and not always nicely. The baddies often thrived. And there was an excellent of display of tits.
Not exactly Mark Kermode analysis but that does it.
GOT is absolutely bog standard in terms of fantasy fiction. It subverts nothing Jon Snow.
A teenage protagonist of mysterious parentage who's plot twist book readers had worked out about 5 pages into the first book. All the standard tropes are happily followed.
It's a bit more ruthless about killing narrative characters than most books. Though it does then start to resurrect them.
You miss the point. The tits are excellent, unnaturally so, the people are gleefully nasty, and the only goody-goody was done away with in the first series. And the scouse wedding scene where the Starks got their come-uppance was a delight.
Yes, there are boring bits, but you know it's all going to end badly.
Boeing won't crash, because it's in no-one's interests for it to crash.
Agreed. Boeing are going absolutely nowhere no matter what happens with the 737MAX. Not only for all the reasons you state but also that the DoD wants a competitor for Lockmart in the NGAD and F/A-XX programs. The USAF are about to buy 80 x F-15EX that they don't particularly just to assist Boeing DS&S in its turf war with Boeing CA.
Can't decide whether to spoil my ballot or vote Labour in local elections. I'm a member of the Conservative party.
If you vote Labour in the locals and it is found out you will be expelled from being a party member.
Voting Brexit Party in European elections nobody wants as a protest vote is just about forgivable, voting Labour in the local elections is not
Surely party members can only be expelled for campaigning for another party, not merely voting?
If not then the Tory membership will half by June!
It's a matter of proof I would think. Any party I should think is within its rights to revoke the membership of someone who says they will vote for another party, but few say that, and in practice it will happen all the time that members do not vote loyally and cannot be policed.
I was going to say something about brexit going quiet and wondering whether we were just going to coast to another crisis in October.
But I take the point being made that everyone’s staying quiet during the local elex campaign. So my question is what happens on Friday? Does an expected* Tory drubbing:
(a) encourage Tories behind the Deal to avoid EU elex? (b) harden other parties against it because they want more electoral fun in three weeks? (c) hasten TM’s departure and scatter the deck completely?
(*while I accept there’ll be a spin operation - “everyone said we’d lose 1000 seats and it was less than 950” - I can’t see a situation where Thursday looks like a good outcome for Tories. Or probably most other parties, the voting system, democracy in general etc)
The Tories will win most seats on Thursday almost certainly given it is mainly the Shires up and London and Wales and Scotland have no local elections.
The LDs though are projected to make more gains than Labour even if Labour win the NEV
Boeing won't crash, because it's in no-one's interests for it to crash.
Agreed. Boeing are going absolutely nowhere no matter what happens with the 737MAX. Not only for all the reasons you state but also that the DoD wants a competitor for Lockmart in the NGAD and F/A-XX programs. The USAF are about to buy 80 x F-15EX that they don't particularly just to assist Boeing DS&S in its turf war with Boeing CA.
I did mention ULA, and that's somewhere your argument falls down. It was in the DoD's interests to have two rocket providers - Boeing and LM - but when Boeing cheated, the two got merged into one company that appears to have worked - at a cost.
I don't think it would happen, but if Boeing's civil aviation business got into problems, I could see it being split up to protect the military side.
I was going to say something about brexit going quiet and wondering whether we were just going to coast to another crisis in October.
But I take the point being made that everyone’s staying quiet during the local elex campaign. So my question is what happens on Friday? Does an expected* Tory drubbing:
(a) encourage Tories behind the Deal to avoid EU elex? (b) harden other parties against it because they want more electoral fun in three weeks? (c) hasten TM’s departure and scatter the deck completely?
(*while I accept there’ll be a spin operation - “everyone said we’d lose 1000 seats and it was less than 950” - I can’t see a situation where Thursday looks like a good outcome for Tories. Or probably most other parties, the voting system, democracy in general etc)
The Tories will win most seats on Thursday almost certainly given it is mainly the Shires up and London and Wales and Scotland have no local elections.
The LDs though are projected to make more gains than Labour even if Labour win the NEV
“Most seats” pretty irrelevant when they’re defending a huge number.
Can't decide whether to spoil my ballot or vote Labour in local elections. I'm a member of the Conservative party.
If you vote Labour in the locals and it is found out you will be expelled from being a party member.
Voting Brexit Party in European elections nobody wants as a protest vote is just about forgivable, voting Labour in the local elections is not
It's a secret ballot, what do you mean by found out?
Though publicly stating a vote is generally seen as equivalent to encouraging others to vote the same way which would be an expelling offence.
It seems incredible that the Tories would tolerate open support for another party, regardless of their opinion of the elections it was for.
The creeps were happy to beg labour voters to vote for them in Scotland, supposedly to stop SNP rather than naked greed. They are not the NASTY party for nothing , no morals , no principles, charlatans.
I was going to say something about brexit going quiet and wondering whether we were just going to coast to another crisis in October.
But I take the point being made that everyone’s staying quiet during the local elex campaign. So my question is what happens on Friday? Does an expected* Tory drubbing:
(a) encourage Tories behind the Deal to avoid EU elex? (b) harden other parties against it because they want more electoral fun in three weeks? (c) hasten TM’s departure and scatter the deck completely?
(*while I accept there’ll be a spin operation - “everyone said we’d lose 1000 seats and it was less than 950” - I can’t see a situation where Thursday looks like a good outcome for Tories. Or probably most other parties, the voting system, democracy in general etc)
The Tories will win most seats on Thursday almost certainly given it is mainly the Shires up and London and Wales and Scotland have no local elections.
The LDs though are projected to make more gains than Labour even if Labour win the NEV
“Most seats” pretty irrelevant when they’re defending a huge number.
In 1995 Labour won most seats even on the same electoral cycle so if Corbyn fails to win it would confirm the Tories are at least not at 1997 meltdown stage
Roger be honest, you dont actually know where Oldham is do you ?
That wasn't a geographical question. I just thought it interesting that we've now got clear proof he's a reincarnation of Enoch Powell and to days Tories are flocking to him like bees around a honey pot. It surely tells you something?
So Game of Thrones is soft porn for men with some dragons and violence thrown in and a light covering of politics to help justify why they are watching it.
I think I’ll stick to lusting after Monty Don and admiring his dog, Nigel. And I get to learn about plants.
So Game of Thrones is soft porn for men with some dragons and violence thrown in and a light covering of politics to help justify why they are watching it.
I think I’ll stick to lusting after Monty Don and admiring his dog, Nigel. And I get to learn about plants.
How very condescending if you were serious. But it's not for everyone and suffered at time from HBO itis - getting over the top with not needing to censor anything.
Roger be honest, you dont actually know where Oldham is do you ?
That wasn't a geographical question. I just thought it interesting that we've now got clear proof he's a reincarnation of Enoch Powell and to days Tories are flocking to him like bees around a honey pot. It surely tells you something?
The recent biography of Attlee was one of my more interesting reads. A difficult man to get to know, but very much a doer rather than orator. When you look at the transformation of the country in his one term, accros so many domains, domestic and foreign, it was a remarkeable government.
So Game of Thrones is soft porn for men with some dragons and violence thrown in and a light covering of politics to help justify why they are watching it.
I think I’ll stick to lusting after Monty Don and admiring his dog, Nigel. And I get to learn about plants.
Not my cup of tea either, but it seems we are missing some of the Zeitgeist.
Apart from anything else, there is not enough time to take in these series. Life is too short. I like films that get through their themes in 2 hours, not 8 years. The power of precis and good editing!
So Game of Thrones is soft porn for men with some dragons and violence thrown in and a light covering of politics to help justify why they are watching it.
I think I’ll stick to lusting after Monty Don and admiring his dog, Nigel. And I get to learn about plants.
How very condescending if you were serious. But it's not for everyone and suffered at time from HBO itis - getting over the top with not needing to censor anything.
Not entirely serious, no, as should have been obvious. Am just a bit amused at how, judging by the most common thing people mention, the most important thing about this amazing series is .... tits.
So Game of Thrones is soft porn for men with some dragons and violence thrown in and a light covering of politics to help justify why they are watching it.
I think I’ll stick to lusting after Monty Don and admiring his dog, Nigel. And I get to learn about plants.
Not my cup of tea either, but it seems we are missing some of the Zeitgeist.
Apart from anything else, there is not enough time to take in these series. Life is too short. I like films that get through their themes in 2 hours, not 8 years. The power of precis and good editing!
90 minutes for me. A film has to be exceptional to justify being longer than that.
By the way, one drama series worth watching is the second series of Berlin Station on All 4. The first was very gripping. The second has just started.
And The Looming Tower gets good reviews, though I have yet to see episode 1 (started on Sunday).
So Game of Thrones is soft porn for men with some dragons and violence thrown in and a light covering of politics to help justify why they are watching it.
I think I’ll stick to lusting after Monty Don and admiring his dog, Nigel. And I get to learn about plants.
How very condescending if you were serious. But it's not for everyone and suffered at time from HBO itis - getting over the top with not needing to censor anything.
Not entirely serious, no, as should have been obvious. Am just a bit amused at how, judging by the most common thing people mention, the most important thing about this amazing series is .... tits.
There were a lot in series 1-3.
Then they realised they had something with staying power and the number of scenes was cut back. This was to the extent that the short scene in the last episode was actually rather jarring and seemed out of place even though it wasn’t particularly explicit
The reason I enjoyed GOT is that it subverted the meme. Er … whatever that means.
The goodies got killed and not always nicely. The baddies often thrived. And there was an excellent of display of tits.
Not exactly Mark Kermode analysis but that does it.
GOT is absolutely bog standard in terms of fantasy fiction. It subverts nothing Jon Snow.
A teenage protagonist of mysterious parentage who's plot twist book readers had worked out about 5 pages into the first book. All the standard tropes are happily followed.
It's a bit more ruthless about killing narrative characters than most books. Though it does then start to resurrect them.
I spotted early on that no point of view character ever dies in their own chapter. Even if they take a mortal wound they only ever die in a different POV character's chapter. (Prologue and epilogue characters excepted)
Comments
Boeing are sh*ts. Their corporate culture is utterly borken if their top guy can say this sot of thing:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47980959
"We made an unsafe plane, but it wasn't our fault they crashed, guv."
It also ignores that, for the first accident at least, the pilots could not react in a proper way because no-one knew about the system that had caused the problem - and the preceding flight only survived because a third pilot guessed. And there are debates about whether the instructions the pilots of the second flight had were comprehensive or even correct.
But despite wanting to blame the pilots, Boeing don't want them to have more training: they've created a simple 15-minute computer-based training program instead of time in the simulator - perhaps because Boeing hasn't built enough such simulators for the Max.
The whole thing stinks.
There's been a very strong blame-the-pilots and it-wouldn't-happen-to-well-trained-us-pilots memes going on t'Internet. I really hope it doesn't turn out that any of these trolls are paid for by Boeing ...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48099901
Anyone got any idea how a deal could be struck that wouldn’t outrage either a large part of the Labour party or a large part of the Conservative party?
The immediate evidence tends to suggest that this is a Swift Boat style operation.
https://morningconsult.com/2020-democratic-primary/
Decent, but not yet decisive so early in the game.
Given that the damage to both parties from a breakdown is much less - provided the blame can be equally carried - suggests you are right a deal doesn’t look likely.
(Seriously it’s probably a better study for aspirant politicians than the west wing. Politics is messy...)
Many eyebrows were raised on Monday when a post from someone named Hunter Kelly appeared on Medium. In the post, Kelly accused Buttigieg of having sexually assaulted. It was Kelly’s only post on Medium, and his accompanying Twitter feed was similarly sparse, having been created just this month. Virtually no mainstream news outlets touched the story, which was probably a good idea. On Monday night, the Daily Beast revealed that Wohl has allegedly been going around trying to gin up false accusations against Buttigieg.
https://splinternews.com/worlds-biggest-moron-appears-to-have-done-it-again-1834400616
The worst that could happen is a reorganisation ala ULA in rocketry, when Lockheed Martin and Boeing's rocket interests were merged after Boeing were caught cheating on a contract. But the US military would hate that.
About the only people who would want Boeing to fail are the people making, or hoping to make, competitor aircraft, such as the Chinese and Russians. Expect their regulators to go through the new code with a fine-tooth comb. And they won't have to do a binary conversion as they probably already have the source code...
Airbus must be delighted.
A dramatic twist across the pond.
Mr. Jessop, watching the news last night, my feeling was similar to yours. Blaming the pilots isn't going to wash.
Personally, I don’t see any advantage in this for Labour other than to be seen to be trying.
Maybe if they get a very soft Brexit that splits the Tories further they’d go for it and then the next Labour leader would try and take us back in.
The news cycle is still speeding up.
"Though the EGM vote is not binding, losing it would be Mrs May’s deepest humiliation yet and spark overwhelming pressure on her to stand down immediately."
(As an aside, surprised that there hasn't been another time when 10% of Tory constituency chairmen haven't wanted to do this over something?)
In all seriousness if people arent enamoured of fantasy worldbuilding, as I am, then they might not make it in long enough to look past superficial thirty stuff early on, or fall in love with the depth of characterisation. Books and show are to my mind often described by its own fans such a way as to make it seen less good than they are, eg by going on about how dark and brutal it is as though a selling point in it's own right.
Plus ca change...
But I will confess to being amazed they are supposedly still talking. Either they are a lot more genuine in the intention for the talks than I thought, or perhaps its just Labour can see talking with them is destroying the Tories and the Gov is desperate .
I still don't understand what is taking so long even if it is genuine that progress is being made.
Pete's price is heading out due to BIDEN's polling surge on entering the race. So is everyone else's.
Game of Thrones Ep 2 of this season was better than Ep 3
The goodies got killed and not always nicely. The baddies often thrived. And there was an excellent of display of tits.
Not exactly Mark Kermode analysis but that does it.
An illustration of his not exactly deft touch:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/sanders-gets-tough-reception-at-minority-womens-event-signaling-challenges-ahead/2019/04/24/baf1b172-66ab-11e9-a1b6-b29b90efa879_story.html
I get the feeling that he might already have touched the ceiling to his support, especially with Warren competing for his natural support on the left of the party and communicating rather better.
In any event, we should get some idea within a week if Biden’s announcement bounce is temporary.
https://metro.co.uk/2019/04/29/nigel-farage-fire-claiming-oldham-divided-society-split-along-racial-lines-9333501/
In 1911, they did almost achieve a national vote on the leadership but Balfour resigned before any vote could take place.
In 1923, one of the decisive factors in choosing Baldwin over Curzon was the huge number of constituency chairmen who contacted the Party warning there would be rebellion if Curzon was chosen.
Keeping an eye on it, though.
A teenage protagonist of mysterious parentage who's plot twist book readers had worked out about 5 pages into the first book. All the standard tropes are happily followed.
Roger be honest, you dont actually know where Oldham is do you ?
It must cheer the heart of former Kippers everywhere.
So if Conservatives feared the Brexit party, they should be desperate to do any deal while Labour should be holding out for the mildest, lowest fat version of Brexit possible.
Voting Brexit Party in European elections nobody wants as a protest vote is just about forgivable, voting Labour in the local elections is not
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04/deutsche-bank-trump-new-york-attorney-general?utm_source=quora&utm_medium=referral
It is the case, however, that it is not as subversive as people think and I like that. The story deconstructed so many of the standard tropes but, and people forget this, it reconstructed them anew in a way that worked. It also, a few areas aside, pulled off a dark, bloody tone without provoking darkness induced apathy, without eliminating humour or any characters one could genuinely like as many lesser imitators did.
GoT has great characters, superb world building and for the most part makes its cliches- and cliches exist for a reason- work. In my opinion people playing up its subversiveness miss the point, but that's just me.
If not then the Tory membership will half by June!
Though publicly stating a vote is generally seen as equivalent to encouraging others to vote the same way which would be an expelling offence.
It seems incredible that the Tories would tolerate open support for another party, regardless of their opinion of the elections it was for.
But I take the point being made that everyone’s staying quiet during the local elex campaign. So my question is what happens on Friday? Does an expected* Tory drubbing:
(a) encourage Tories behind the Deal to avoid EU elex?
(b) harden other parties against it because they want more electoral fun in three weeks?
(c) hasten TM’s departure and scatter the deck completely?
(*while I accept there’ll be a spin operation - “everyone said we’d lose 1000 seats and it was less than 950” - I can’t see a situation where Thursday looks like a good outcome for Tories. Or probably most other parties, the voting system, democracy in general etc)
You miss the point. The tits are excellent, unnaturally so, the people are gleefully nasty, and the only goody-goody was done away with in the first series. And the scouse wedding scene where the Starks got their come-uppance was a delight.
Yes, there are boring bits, but you know it's all going to end badly.
The LDs though are projected to make more gains than Labour even if Labour win the NEV
I don't think it would happen, but if Boeing's civil aviation business got into problems, I could see it being split up to protect the military side.
I think I’ll stick to lusting after Monty Don and admiring his dog, Nigel. And I get to learn about plants.
There's some top notch stuff in there. Charles Dance as Tywin Lannister is particularly excellent.
The recent biography of Attlee was one of my more interesting reads. A difficult man to get to know, but very much a doer rather than orator. When you look at the transformation of the country in his one term, accros so many domains, domestic and foreign, it was a remarkeable government.
Apart from anything else, there is not enough time to take in these series. Life is too short. I like films that get through their themes in 2 hours, not 8 years. The power of precis and good editing!
https://twitter.com/sarahjebner/status/1122947852370632704?s=21
90 minutes for me. A film has to be exceptional to justify being longer than that.
By the way, one drama series worth watching is the second series of Berlin Station on All 4. The first was very gripping. The second has just started.
And The Looming Tower gets good reviews, though I have yet to see episode 1 (started on Sunday).
Then they realised they had something with staying power and the number of scenes was cut back. This was to the extent that the short scene in the last episode was actually rather jarring and seemed out of place even though it wasn’t particularly explicit