Trump's detractors still don't understand him, after 4 years.
Unfortunately for the President, a lot of independents now do.
The wildly unrepresentative handful of Americans I know are absolutely going to vote Biden to get rid of Trump. Their minds are completely made up I can't conceive of anything that would change them. The bad news for Trump is that some of them are people who have been apolitical or antipolitical as long as I have known them, and haven't voted for many election cycles. I can't imagine opinion polls picking them up. I wouldn't be surprised if the polls end up underestimating Biden's lead, though it could go either way, obviously.
Polls have been indicating for a while that most people made up their minds a long time ago about Trump, and the majority are against. Even a booming economy wouldn't make him favorite imo.
As a matter of anecdotal interest, which states ? The one I know are Californian, so not ideal barometers of opinion.
Because Californians would never vote for some guy just because they'd seen him on the telly and were star-struck? Reagan, Arnie, now Trump.
Reagan was a serious operator and head of the actors union and then governor of California
Arnie was a special case - Gray Davis, the Democrat, had just been recalled and this was a special election
I wonder how Labour play the Last Night at the Proms "issue".
Personally couldn't give a toss, I defer to anyone else that cares
They ignore it. It's a misreported non-issue that's nothing to do with them and is not worthy of comment.
Exactly , only a few nutters give a hoot about last night at the Proms, it is total jingoistic imperialist merde in any event.
FWIW the first 3/4 of the night is a normal concert. Then there are a couple of songs that people sing along with - it’s more of a crowd event than what they are singing. It’s like a rugby crowd singing Flowers of Edinburgh.
OT it turns out the suspicious results that the Organization of American States used to question the Bolivian election were an artifact of a sorting error in Stata.
Cricket and the weather. The draw has lengthened to 1.7 from 1.4 last night.
This is all about whether there is enough play for Anderson to get his 600th wicket. There is almost no chance of a result now.
I'm not following the match but a quick look at the situation suggests it will have to be almost a complete washout/Greyout for Anderson not to make it. Root is hardly going to keep Bess and himself bowling when play starts, and Anderson will be pumped pumped up for that one wicket. And he thoroughly deserves it, he has been a superb bowler for England for a long time, longer than most fast bolwers last.
Cricket and the weather. The draw has lengthened to 1.7 from 1.4 last night.
This is all about whether there is enough play for Anderson to get his 600th wicket. There is almost no chance of a result now.
I'm not following the match but a quick look at the situation suggests it will have to be almost a complete washout/Greyout for Anderson not to make it. Root is hardly going to keep Bess and himself bowling when play starts, and Anderson will be pumped pumped up for that one wicket. And he thoroughly deserves it, he has been a superb bowler for England for a long time, longer than most fast bolwers last.
Although unless England’s infielders have learned how to catch overnight, he’ll have to do it via a yorker.
Having just seen the report on Trump last night I have to say it was very slick and I cannot stand the man
Maybe everyone needs to be cautious over calling this a Biden walkover
And I do not follow US politics at all
Anyone taking a Biden walkover seriously isn't paying attention.
The xenopbia works, the fear of the "socialist" that is Biden, touches a nerve and the industrial scale cheating planned for November could pull Trump across the line easily.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Having just seen the report on Trump last night I have to say it was very slick and I cannot stand the man
Maybe everyone needs to be cautious over calling this a Biden walkover
And I do not follow US politics at all
Anyone taking a Biden walkover seriously isn't paying attention.
The xenopbia works, the fear of the "socialist" that is Biden, touches a nerve and the industrial scale cheating planned for November could pull Trump across the line easily.
Does fear of a "socialist" Joe Biden really touch a nerve? Is there some evidence that it's cutting through? It feels exceedingly un-nerve-touching. His platform is actually fairly radical as recent ones go, but he comes over as a very un-radical person.
South Korean health authorities have ordered the closure of most schools in Seoul and classes to be held online due to the increase in cases. The country's disease prevention center has reported 280 new cases in the last 24 hours, bringing infections to 17,945. In this country, the number of deaths from the new coronavirus is 310. (Source: Reuters. Photo: EFE / EPA / Yonhap)
A dialog "you are all too stupid and enmeshed in your liberal elite views to understamnd why Trump is so phenomenally popular which is why he won the election over the hugely unpopular Hilary Clinton" "Trump got 3 million less votes than Clinton" "Ah, I'm talking about his appeal to the White Working Classes which you would never understand with your Liberal elite views. His huge popularity with the WWC is why he won rust belt states like Wisconsin the like of which Romney could never reach" "Trump got less votes than Romney in Wisconsin" "You'll never understand Trump"
Another way that Trump and Johnson rhyme.
Both their election wins were substantially down to the failings of their opponents, but they took their wins as signs of their brilliance and a mandate to do whatever the hell they liked.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
I also suspect an expression of that fear is not admitting in public - even to pollsters - that they put their faith in Trump to be the guy to best look after them. Sure, Trump is an idiot. But he's their idiot....
It's just not something you admit to.
I mean people were shy about voting for John Major. He's got nothing on Trump
Boris is the British Trump, both in terms of charisma and casual disregard for rules and norms. I imagine Labour and Conservative Party workers will be closely examining this campaign for that reason (and not just because they always do).
Not even close. True there are some parallels, but while Johnson shares the narcissism, it’s not combined with the same raging egomania or megalomania.
Johnson has limits; Trump has none.
Difference is that Johnson is not just as sneaky or sly as Trump, Trump is cunning whereas Bozo is not nearly as sharp. Both cheeks of the same arse though. PS: Hence why Bozo needs a sewer rat like Cummings pulling his strings
Is Trump cunning? He seems like a bull in a china shop to me, and relies on the support of those around him for the cunning. But I do realise that someone good at cunning does not let on how cunning they are.
No, but he has a genius for emotional manipulation.
As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
72 days.
That's how long is left.
And Biden continues to average over 50% in the polls. Which Clinton never did.
Now. It's entirely possible the polls are wrong. And it's possible that this issue of law and order will completely dominate the election. And I totally buy that Trump voters are more enthused.
The problem is that Trump should be closing the gap. He's not. Indeed, the polls seem to be worsening for him. And the economic news is not good. New unemployment claims were back at almost a million last week, that's a sharp reversal of previous progress.
Can I see Trump winning? Of course I can.
But while I thought he was value at 30% a month ago, he's now above 40%, when his polling position has worsened.
Law and order may be his way back. But it's a stretch. It's a lot easier to run on a "all is anarchy, you need me to get order" when you're the challenger than when you're the incumbent.
I think that this is the key difference. Biden doesn't have many more positives than Clinton but he has a hell of a lot fewer negatives.
The mood on here seems to be that, while best not to be complacent, the odds very much lie with Biden (@DavidL, that is not aimed at you BTW). I wouldn't be too confident in that. The Republicans are pretty good on their ground game and, if it was the pattern that some were outlining on here of consistent Biden leads that are unlikely to be pulled back by Trump, you would expect to see more panic in the GOP's action. There isn't. They seem quite comfortable with where they are and reasonably confident, especially given the macro situation.
Now, I am sure some will put that down to the industrial-style cheating the GOP is planning for November, including decapitating the USPS etc etc but it might be worth stepping back and thinking why Trump and the Republicans are not running around like headless chickens, especially given the personal issues involved for Trump.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
Having just seen the report on Trump last night I have to say it was very slick and I cannot stand the man
Maybe everyone needs to be cautious over calling this a Biden walkover
And I do not follow US politics at all
Anyone taking a Biden walkover seriously isn't paying attention.
The xenopbia works, the fear of the "socialist" that is Biden, touches a nerve and the industrial scale cheating planned for November could pull Trump across the line easily.
Does fear of a "socialist" Joe Biden really touch a nerve? Is there some evidence that it's cutting through? It feels exceedingly un-nerve-touching. His platform is actually fairly radical as recent ones go, but he comes over as a very un-radical person.
The idea that anyone who’s been a Senator for Delaware is a socialist is quite amusing.
Trump's detractors still don't understand him, after 4 years.
Unfortunately for the President, a lot of independents now do.
The wildly unrepresentative handful of Americans I know are absolutely going to vote Biden to get rid of Trump. Their minds are completely made up I can't conceive of anything that would change them. The bad news for Trump is that some of them are people who have been apolitical or antipolitical as long as I have known them, and haven't voted for many election cycles. I can't imagine opinion polls picking them up. I wouldn't be surprised if the polls end up underestimating Biden's lead, though it could go either way, obviously.
Polls have been indicating for a while that most people made up their minds a long time ago about Trump, and the majority are against. Even a booming economy wouldn't make him favorite imo.
As a matter of anecdotal interest, which states ? The one I know are Californian, so not ideal barometers of opinion.
Because Californians would never vote for some guy just because they'd seen him on the telly and were star-struck? Reagan, Arnie, now Trump.
Arnie is a Republican but intelligent and not an anti-science climate change denier (quite the opposite).
IIRC Arnie went green long before it was fashionable - certainly in American politics.
Interesting note - one of his big actions (for the time) was converting his Humvee to electric. There was a small, but thriving (and very expensive) electrify-your-car market in California at the time, run by a group of car customisation shops. 6 figure costs, with top end tech.
It was the performance of the these conversions that kicked off what became Tesla - which was based on the idea "How cheap can it get, if we take the high end electrification tech, building it into a car designed for it and get it into production?"
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration...
Because the people simply can’t be there this year.
it might be worth stepping back and thinking why Trump and the Republicans are not running around like headless chickens, especially given the personal issues involved for Trump.
I think this is easily explained: Trump is delusional, and the rest of the GOP (congresspeople, senators and party officials) would be happy to get rid of him, although they can't say so for fear of being lynched by their base.
Also from the outside I don't really know how you'd be able to differentiate between Trump running around like a headless chicken and Trump acting normally, it's not like he's a model of decorum and consistency.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
I also suspect an expression of that fear is not admitting in public - even to pollsters - that they put their faith in Trump to be the guy to best look after them. Sure, Trump is an idiot. But he's their idiot....
It's just not something you admit to.
I mean people were shy about voting for John Major. He's got nothing on Trump
Boris is the British Trump, both in terms of charisma and casual disregard for rules and norms. I imagine Labour and Conservative Party workers will be closely examining this campaign for that reason (and not just because they always do).
Not even close. True there are some parallels, but while Johnson shares the narcissism, it’s not combined with the same raging egomania or megalomania.
Johnson has limits; Trump has none.
Difference is that Johnson is not just as sneaky or sly as Trump, Trump is cunning whereas Bozo is not nearly as sharp. Both cheeks of the same arse though. PS: Hence why Bozo needs a sewer rat like Cummings pulling his strings
Is Trump cunning? He seems like a bull in a china shop to me, and relies on the support of those around him for the cunning. But I do realise that someone good at cunning does not let on how cunning they are.
No, but he has a genius for emotional manipulation.
Great insight and so basic. I try to cling to logic by my fingertips and that made me twitch.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.
Trump's detractors still don't understand him, after 4 years.
Unfortunately for the President, a lot of independents now do.
The wildly unrepresentative handful of Americans I know are absolutely going to vote Biden to get rid of Trump. Their minds are completely made up I can't conceive of anything that would change them. The bad news for Trump is that some of them are people who have been apolitical or antipolitical as long as I have known them, and haven't voted for many election cycles. I can't imagine opinion polls picking them up. I wouldn't be surprised if the polls end up underestimating Biden's lead, though it could go either way, obviously.
Polls have been indicating for a while that most people made up their minds a long time ago about Trump, and the majority are against. Even a booming economy wouldn't make him favorite imo.
As a matter of anecdotal interest, which states ? The one I know are Californian, so not ideal barometers of opinion.
Because Californians would never vote for some guy just because they'd seen him on the telly and were star-struck? Reagan, Arnie, now Trump.
Reagan was a serious operator and head of the actors union and then governor of California
Arnie was a special case - Gray Davis, the Democrat, had just been recalled and this was a special election
Reagan had moved from acting to politics *decades* before he became President. And worked his way up, becoming a *two term* Governor of California. And had the polling to go for a third term, IIRC.
Gray Davis enabled Enron to hold California to ransom over power rates and a number of other stupidities. Essentially he tried triangulation on just about everything - and upset *everyone*.
As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
72 days.
That's how long is left.
And Biden continues to average over 50% in the polls. Which Clinton never did.
Now. It's entirely possible the polls are wrong. And it's possible that this issue of law and order will completely dominate the election. And I totally buy that Trump voters are more enthused.
The problem is that Trump should be closing the gap. He's not. Indeed, the polls seem to be worsening for him. And the economic news is not good. New unemployment claims were back at almost a million last week, that's a sharp reversal of previous progress.
Can I see Trump winning? Of course I can.
But while I thought he was value at 30% a month ago, he's now above 40%, when his polling position has worsened.
Law and order may be his way back. But it's a stretch. It's a lot easier to run on a "all is anarchy, you need me to get order" when you're the challenger than when you're the incumbent.
I think that this is the key difference. Biden doesn't have many more positives than Clinton but he has a hell of a lot fewer negatives.
The mood on here seems to be that, while best not to be complacent, the odds very much lie with Biden (@DavidL, that is not aimed at you BTW). I wouldn't be too confident in that. The Republicans are pretty good on their ground game and, if it was the pattern that some were outlining on here of consistent Biden leads that are unlikely to be pulled back by Trump, you would expect to see more panic in the GOP's action. There isn't. They seem quite comfortable with where they are and reasonably confident, especially given the macro situation.
Now, I am sure some will put that down to the industrial-style cheating the GOP is planning for November, including decapitating the USPS etc etc but it might be worth stepping back and thinking why Trump and the Republicans are not running around like headless chickens, especially given the personal issues involved for Trump.
The Dems had an excellent "ground game" in 2008. Hopefully in the last 3 years they have taken a hard look at how they lost it in 2016 (that means not just lazily blaming it on the candidate), and work out how to do better this time round.
As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
72 days.
That's how long is left.
And Biden continues to average over 50% in the polls. Which Clinton never did.
Now. It's entirely possible the polls are wrong. And it's possible that this issue of law and order will completely dominate the election. And I totally buy that Trump voters are more enthused.
The problem is that Trump should be closing the gap. He's not. Indeed, the polls seem to be worsening for him. And the economic news is not good. New unemployment claims were back at almost a million last week, that's a sharp reversal of previous progress.
Can I see Trump winning? Of course I can.
But while I thought he was value at 30% a month ago, he's now above 40%, when his polling position has worsened.
Law and order may be his way back. But it's a stretch. It's a lot easier to run on a "all is anarchy, you need me to get order" when you're the challenger than when you're the incumbent.
I think that this is the key difference. Biden doesn't have many more positives than Clinton but he has a hell of a lot fewer negatives.
The mood on here seems to be that, while best not to be complacent, the odds very much lie with Biden (@DavidL, that is not aimed at you BTW). I wouldn't be too confident in that. The Republicans are pretty good on their ground game and, if it was the pattern that some were outlining on here of consistent Biden leads that are unlikely to be pulled back by Trump, you would expect to see more panic in the GOP's action. There isn't. They seem quite comfortable with where they are and reasonably confident, especially given the macro situation.
Now, I am sure some will put that down to the industrial-style cheating the GOP is planning for November, including decapitating the USPS etc etc but it might be worth stepping back and thinking why Trump and the Republicans are not running around like headless chickens, especially given the personal issues involved for Trump.
Trump sometimes seems to concede that he's going to lose (and hence the need for the fraud accusation). He appears to be saying - I would have won if it weren't for that Chinese virus.
The GOP response to Biden's speech gave a good impression of a decapitated fowl.
I think that Trump might win for all sorts of reasons (voter suppression, Covid suddenly fizzles out, shy Trump voters etc) but the demeanour of the GOP is not a good indicator. They have to appear confident no matter what - even if Trump himself isn't.
Cricket and the weather. The draw has lengthened to 1.7 from 1.4 last night.
This is all about whether there is enough play for Anderson to get his 600th wicket. There is almost no chance of a result now.
I'm less sure of that now. If (big if) dry by noon, play by 2.00, could get 50 overs in, 8 wickets needed. It does depend on how swiftly the rain moves through, if there are any showers and how quickly they can dry the ground out.
A dialog "you are all too stupid and enmeshed in your liberal elite views to understamnd why Trump is so phenomenally popular which is why he won the election over the hugely unpopular Hilary Clinton" "Trump got 3 million less votes than Clinton" "Ah, I'm talking about his appeal to the White Working Classes which you would never understand with your Liberal elite views. His huge popularity with the WWC is why he won rust belt states like Wisconsin the like of which Romney could never reach" "Trump got less votes than Romney in Wisconsin" "You'll never understand Trump"
Another way that Trump and Johnson rhyme.
Both their election wins were substantially down to the failings of their opponents, but they took their wins as signs of their brilliance and a mandate to do whatever the hell they liked.
When first read that I thought you were talking about Lyndon B. not Alexander Boris de Pfeffel.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
72 days.
That's how long is left.
And Biden continues to average over 50% in the polls. Which Clinton never did.
Now. It's entirely possible the polls are wrong. And it's possible that this issue of law and order will completely dominate the election. And I totally buy that Trump voters are more enthused.
The problem is that Trump should be closing the gap. He's not. Indeed, the polls seem to be worsening for him. And the economic news is not good. New unemployment claims were back at almost a million last week, that's a sharp reversal of previous progress.
Can I see Trump winning? Of course I can.
But while I thought he was value at 30% a month ago, he's now above 40%, when his polling position has worsened.
Law and order may be his way back. But it's a stretch. It's a lot easier to run on a "all is anarchy, you need me to get order" when you're the challenger than when you're the incumbent.
I think that this is the key difference. Biden doesn't have many more positives than Clinton but he has a hell of a lot fewer negatives.
The mood on here seems to be that, while best not to be complacent, the odds very much lie with Biden (@DavidL, that is not aimed at you BTW). I wouldn't be too confident in that. The Republicans are pretty good on their ground game and, if it was the pattern that some were outlining on here of consistent Biden leads that are unlikely to be pulled back by Trump, you would expect to see more panic in the GOP's action. There isn't. They seem quite comfortable with where they are and reasonably confident, especially given the macro situation.
Now, I am sure some will put that down to the industrial-style cheating the GOP is planning for November, including decapitating the USPS etc etc but it might be worth stepping back and thinking why Trump and the Republicans are not running around like headless chickens, especially given the personal issues involved for Trump.
The Dems had an excellent "ground game" in 2008. Hopefully in the last 3 years they have taken a hard look at how they lost it in 2016 (that means not just lazily blaming it on the candidate), and work out how to do better this time round.
Do they have an excellent ground game in the states (and counties within states) that actually matter, though? It's hardly as if activists can be sent from California or New York to go knocking up in Florida or wherever.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
"Give it to another broadcaster." You are joking, right?
The Proms in their current form are a BBC thing. Yes, there's the lineage back to Henry Wood, but without the BBC there's nothing for another broadcaster to broadcast. They're planned by BBC people, and the main performers are BBC orchestras.
There's nothing stopping Sky or Classic FM broadcasting an evening concert of patriotic songs, apart from orchestras being awfully expensive things and live classical music being a bit of a niche market. So bluntly, no BBC, no Proms.
And besides, the pathetic moralism is just as likely on the side of the Beeb bashers. This year, the last night won't have a big raucous audience, so the usual Last Night fun would look and sound a bit pathetic, like wearing a clown suit to choral evensong. There's also a fair question about whether this is a year to have this particular bit of fun, or whether- like in 2001- we need something a bit different.
Artistically, they've probably got it about right.
Cricket and the weather. The draw has lengthened to 1.7 from 1.4 last night.
This is all about whether there is enough play for Anderson to get his 600th wicket. There is almost no chance of a result now.
I'm not following the match but a quick look at the situation suggests it will have to be almost a complete washout/Greyout for Anderson not to make it. Root is hardly going to keep Bess and himself bowling when play starts, and Anderson will be pumped pumped up for that one wicket. And he thoroughly deserves it, he has been a superb bowler for England for a long time, longer than most fast bolwers last.
Although unless England’s infielders have learned how to catch overnight, he’ll have to do it via a yorker.
A yorker attempt first ball has got to be a good call, as that brings LBW into play aswell. As it's going to be a draw anyway, leaking some runs on the leg side is not a worry.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
Simultaneously vastly more enthusiastic than a Biden voter, which you can tell by looking at the polling, yet simultaneously undetectable by polls due to shyness.
A true phenomena.
I'm skeptical about the "shy Trump voter", post-election analysis last time seemed to show that it was a very minor factor (if anything) in the polling errors.
But I could imagine those enthusiastically moronic Trump voters making the shy Trump voters even shyer?
Any polling errors in national vote share were simply "margin of error" errors.
"Despite all this, however, nationwide polling was not far off from the actual popular vote result, and in fact very few states had results that deviated from the margin of error in the polling average. In a FiveThirtyEight article, Nate Silver defended the performance of the polls in 2016 as historically average, and argued that "Media organizations need to do a better job of informing their readers about the uncertainties associated with polling" [631]."
Indeed, although there were a few states that were worse: Ohio, final polling average Trump 2% ahead. Actual vote Trump 8% ahead Wisconsin Clinton 6%, Trump won by 0.8% PA Clinton 4% ahead, Trump won by 0.6% Michigan Clinton 4%, Trump won by 0.4%
With 50 states you would expect a few outliers, but these are all more or less "mid-west", with some demographic similarities so clearly no coincidence. I remember analysis suggesting the biggest factor was late deciders breaking heavily for Trump, rather than "shy Trumpers". I wonder if the polls were also missing a specifically anti-Clinton vote, as the polling for the Michigan Democrat primary which Sanders unexpectedly won, was way out.
In any case, I think someone on here posted something which weakly suggested that historically than can be a tendency for polls to be out in the opposite direction to the last election, as pollsters try to adjust for the error and end up over-compensating. Personally, I just assume that there is a 50% chance of the polls being out in either direction.
BUT I think the discrepancy between Trump's Betfair odds and eg the current 538 forecast is less to do with trying to guess how the polling is wrong, and much more to do with the uncertainty in how people might change their minds between now and November.
On the one hand, there are not so many undecideds, the polling has been quite stable for a few weeks, and the disapproval ratings for the last 3.5 years suggest that people have already made up their minds, and therefore Trump has a mountain to climb.
On the other hand, there might be relatively better economic news coming before the election. And relatively better coronavirus news coming (of course, these 2 things are connected). So the polling is only going to move one way, and Trump might have a good chance of winning.
I don't know, but I've got to be optimistic that enough people have already made up their minds about Trump, and nothing is going to change their minds in the next weeks. And Trump himself probably isn't capable of doing anything except playing to his base, and it won't be enough.
As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
72 days.
That's how long is left.
And Biden continues to average over 50% in the polls. Which Clinton never did.
Now. It's entirely possible the polls are wrong. And it's possible that this issue of law and order will completely dominate the election. And I totally buy that Trump voters are more enthused.
The problem is that Trump should be closing the gap. He's not. Indeed, the polls seem to be worsening for him. And the economic news is not good. New unemployment claims were back at almost a million last week, that's a sharp reversal of previous progress.
Can I see Trump winning? Of course I can.
But while I thought he was value at 30% a month ago, he's now above 40%, when his polling position has worsened.
Law and order may be his way back. But it's a stretch. It's a lot easier to run on a "all is anarchy, you need me to get order" when you're the challenger than when you're the incumbent.
I think that this is the key difference. Biden doesn't have many more positives than Clinton but he has a hell of a lot fewer negatives.
The mood on here seems to be that, while best not to be complacent, the odds very much lie with Biden (@DavidL, that is not aimed at you BTW). I wouldn't be too confident in that. The Republicans are pretty good on their ground game and, if it was the pattern that some were outlining on here of consistent Biden leads that are unlikely to be pulled back by Trump, you would expect to see more panic in the GOP's action. There isn't. They seem quite comfortable with where they are and reasonably confident, especially given the macro situation.
Now, I am sure some will put that down to the industrial-style cheating the GOP is planning for November, including decapitating the USPS etc etc but it might be worth stepping back and thinking why Trump and the Republicans are not running around like headless chickens, especially given the personal issues involved for Trump.
The Dems had an excellent "ground game" in 2008. Hopefully in the last 3 years they have taken a hard look at how they lost it in 2016 (that means not just lazily blaming it on the candidate), and work out how to do better this time round.
Do they have an excellent ground game in the states (and counties within states) that actually matter, though? It's hardly as if activists can be sent from California or New York to go knocking up in Florida or wherever.
The Democrats won Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin in 2012. It#s not as if the party can't get their acts together in those states.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.
*DISCLAIMER FOR THE PURPOSES OF BEING AN ARGUMENTATIVE SOD ON PB*
Thing is, let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian whose flavour of belief held that homosexuality was a sin. You are deeply offended by all things which reference or "promote" homosexuality. The BBC features its usual Pride celebrations which offends you. So you don't watch it. All is good, right?
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
"Give it to another broadcaster." You are joking, right?
The Proms in their current form are a BBC thing. Yes, there's the lineage back to Henry Wood, but without the BBC there's nothing for another broadcaster to broadcast. They're planned by BBC people, and the main performers are BBC orchestras.
There's nothing stopping Sky or Classic FM broadcasting an evening concert of patriotic songs, apart from orchestras being awfully expensive things and live classical music being a bit of a niche market. So bluntly, no BBC, no Proms.
And besides, the pathetic moralism is just as likely on the side of the Beeb bashers. This year, the last night won't have a big raucous audience, so the usual Last Night fun would look and sound a bit pathetic, like wearing a clown suit to choral evensong. There's also a fair question about whether this is a year to have this particular bit of fun, or whether- like in 2001- we need something a bit different.
Artistically, they've probably got it about right.
I don't think there's anything wrong with the changes for this year. But the BBC are giving the impression that the changes are being made because of BLM not COVID-19 (or planes crashing into buildings as in 2001).
My mother-in-law, a native of Staten Island now living in Ireland, is convinced that the Covid death toll will be the end of Trump. She says that death is seen as the ultimate failure in the US, and that will finish Trump.
I do wonder though whether the death toll will be believed in a post-truth era. In any normal time I'm sure that Trump would be facing a record defeat for his fatal bungling over Covid.
As was posted on the previous thread, the issue of riots and concern over law and order is now starting to seep into US voters' minds as to which way to vote.
This is going to be the issue that will kill the Democrats. I'm sure we will have the usual "but it's not in the polls" argument but gun sales going through the roof tells you how scared many Americans are by what is happened at the moment. It is unlikely they will think Joe Biden is the person to fix the mess.
72 days.
That's how long is left.
And Biden continues to average over 50% in the polls. Which Clinton never did.
Now. It's entirely possible the polls are wrong. And it's possible that this issue of law and order will completely dominate the election. And I totally buy that Trump voters are more enthused.
The problem is that Trump should be closing the gap. He's not. Indeed, the polls seem to be worsening for him. And the economic news is not good. New unemployment claims were back at almost a million last week, that's a sharp reversal of previous progress.
Can I see Trump winning? Of course I can.
But while I thought he was value at 30% a month ago, he's now above 40%, when his polling position has worsened.
Law and order may be his way back. But it's a stretch. It's a lot easier to run on a "all is anarchy, you need me to get order" when you're the challenger than when you're the incumbent.
I think that this is the key difference. Biden doesn't have many more positives than Clinton but he has a hell of a lot fewer negatives.
The mood on here seems to be that, while best not to be complacent, the odds very much lie with Biden (@DavidL, that is not aimed at you BTW). I wouldn't be too confident in that. The Republicans are pretty good on their ground game and, if it was the pattern that some were outlining on here of consistent Biden leads that are unlikely to be pulled back by Trump, you would expect to see more panic in the GOP's action. There isn't. They seem quite comfortable with where they are and reasonably confident, especially given the macro situation.
Now, I am sure some will put that down to the industrial-style cheating the GOP is planning for November, including decapitating the USPS etc etc but it might be worth stepping back and thinking why Trump and the Republicans are not running around like headless chickens, especially given the personal issues involved for Trump.
The Dems had an excellent "ground game" in 2008. Hopefully in the last 3 years they have taken a hard look at how they lost it in 2016 (that means not just lazily blaming it on the candidate), and work out how to do better this time round.
It was her campaign team wot dun it.
A bunch of ludicrous 12d chess players who repeatedly ignored on the ground reports and canvassing to direct resources away from where they were needed.
If any senior campaigner from 201y is involved in 2020 Biden is fucked and deserves to be fucked.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
They've been outdated for 50 years FFS.
They may be outdated and irrelevant to 'the world', but not to the people who enjoy Last Night of the Proms. That's the point.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
I agree, but without an audience will be a different atmosphere. Indeed quite the metaphor for the end of Empire. The band cranks up the old tunes, but no one to hear.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
The conductor and a few prominent classical musicians, including campaigning organisations, called for their removal and sensed an opportunity to do so this year due to both Covid (no crowds) and the BLM movement (politics). BBC commissioning editors and programmers would have had strong sympathies with them, due to their own personal politics.
They represent about 10-20% of the electorate, at best.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.
Who are you to demand what “should” be done?
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
They've been outdated for 50 years FFS.
They may be outdated and irrelevant to 'the world', but not to the people who enjoy Last Night of the Proms. That's the point.
I'll tell you something else that's outdated: 5 November. But we still do it as it's good fun.
And what on earth are all those blokes dressed in red with funny hats doing outside Buckingham Palace every morning? I think they might be carrying weapons also. Have the police been informed?
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
If they were outdated and irrelevant no-one would book tickets to see the concerts or sing them.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.
*DISCLAIMER FOR THE PURPOSES OF BEING AN ARGUMENTATIVE SOD ON PB*
Thing is, let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian whose flavour of belief held that homosexuality was a sin. You are deeply offended by all things which reference or "promote" homosexuality. The BBC features its usual Pride celebrations which offends you. So you don't watch it. All is good, right?
Who is to say what is offensive?
The more apposite example is the other way around. Let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian attending sermons containing content hostile towards homosexuals....
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.
The BBC offers a lot of content that is 'offensive' to various population subsets. For example, sexual content that is offensive to strict Christians and Muslims. The solution has always been, don't watch it. So yes, it absolutely works.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.
Who are you to demand what “should” be done?
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
I didn’t demand just suggested that it should be, same with the farcity cricket at Lords and Rugby at Twickenham.
I wonder what would have happened if black men with guns had attempted to break into the state house.
Absolutely. The degree of tolerance given to these gun totting lunatics is just bizarre.
No matter the history of the nation and why they have the gun rules they have, I will never understand why so many americans love guns as much as they do, where it genuinely seems to be more important than any other issue and mean that they should be able to take and use their guns absolutlely everywhere. Even with a small number of people having a lot of guns and that skewing the average, the tolerance of the actions of those people just beggars belief.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.
*DISCLAIMER FOR THE PURPOSES OF BEING AN ARGUMENTATIVE SOD ON PB*
Thing is, let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian whose flavour of belief held that homosexuality was a sin. You are deeply offended by all things which reference or "promote" homosexuality. The BBC features its usual Pride celebrations which offends you. So you don't watch it. All is good, right?
Who is to say what is offensive?
I'm struggling with this and similar controversies and maybe it is because I am a white middle/older aged white male so I have less reason to be offending.
I am as about as unpatriotic as you can get, but I love the last night of the proms. People getting together, enjoying themselves, being silly and having a good sing song. Must admit I don't think much about the words or history of it, other than it is a nice tradition (like pantomimes or silly stuff other nationalities do which I also enjoy).
And after all it is not as if those attending are rubbing their British nationalism in the face of others since every flag under the sun is normally on display and with oodles of EU flags to boot.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
They've been outdated for 50 years FFS.
They may be outdated and irrelevant to 'the world', but not to the people who enjoy Last Night of the Proms. That's the point.
I know, the reason why it's come up now is BLM.
Actually I don't think BLM is responsible, its the Beeb using BLM as a cover to cleanse things it's never liked.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.
Who are you to demand what “should” be done?
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
I didn’t demand just suggested that it should be, same with the farcity cricket at Lords and Rugby at Twickenham.
Does the popularity of these events not “suggest” to you that there remains a place for them? What’s with people these days feeling it’s their right to “suggest” to other people how they should and shouldn’t spend their leisure time and money. It’s not like a rowing race or rugby match exploits slaves like at the colosseum. Get over yourself.
I wonder what would have happened if black men with guns had attempted to break into the state house.
Absolutely. The degree of tolerance given to these gun totting lunatics is just bizarre.
No matter the history of the nation and why they have the gun rules they have, I will never understand why so many americans love guns as much as they do, where it genuinely seems to be more important than any other issue and mean that they should be able to take and use their guns absolutlely everywhere. Even with a small number of people having a lot of guns and that skewing the average, the tolerance of the actions of those people just beggars belief.
Bruno Macaes argues that American culture is dominated by 'stories' and individual Americans' attitudes by a perception that they are each starring in the film of their own life. He suggests that the emotional attachment to guns arises not so much from the usually argued 'rights and freedoms' but because, in the back of their mind they have a storyline in which life delivers them the chance to become the movie hero who sees off the terrorist or armed robber. The fact that most of them rarely get the gun out of the drawer is by the by.
Wait a minute - are the same people saying "the Democrats are going to lose because they are so complacent" also saying "the Republicans are going to win because they are so confident"? Or is it different people? I can't remember.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
They've been outdated for 50 years FFS.
Songs, poems, plays and stories that contain words that originally were of their time are regularly re-interpreted for today without taking a poleaxe to them.
In fact, that's already happening in reverse by the detractors because they're assuming "Britons never never never shall be slaves" is a reference to the transatlantic slave trade, whereas in fact it was a defiant call of the distinctiveness of Britain in moving toward constitutional monarchy, in contrast to Royal absolutism in Europe, and an exhortation to fund the navy properly to defend Britain against it.
It gained currency during the War of the Austrian Succession, when Britain was at war with both France and Spain, who are the "tyrants" referred to within it.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.
*DISCLAIMER FOR THE PURPOSES OF BEING AN ARGUMENTATIVE SOD ON PB*
Thing is, let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian whose flavour of belief held that homosexuality was a sin. You are deeply offended by all things which reference or "promote" homosexuality. The BBC features its usual Pride celebrations which offends you. So you don't watch it. All is good, right?
Who is to say what is offensive?
I'm struggling with this and similar controversies and maybe it is because I am a white middle/older aged white male so I have less reason to be offending.
I am as about as unpatriotic as you can get, but I love the last night of the proms. People getting together, enjoying themselves, being silly and having a good sing song. Must admit I don't think much about the words or history of it, other than it is a nice tradition (like pantomimes or silly stuff other nationalities do which I also enjoy).
And after all it is not as if those attending are rubbing their British nationalism in the face of others since every flag under the sun is normally on display and with oodles of EU flags to boot.
A dialog "you are all too stupid and enmeshed in your liberal elite views to understamnd why Trump is so phenomenally popular which is why he won the election over the hugely unpopular Hilary Clinton" "Trump got 3 million less votes than Clinton" "Ah, I'm talking about his appeal to the White Working Classes which you would never understand with your Liberal elite views. His huge popularity with the WWC is why he won rust belt states like Wisconsin the like of which Romney could never reach" "Trump got less votes than Romney in Wisconsin" "You'll never understand Trump"
Another way that Trump and Johnson rhyme.
Both their election wins were substantially down to the failings of their opponents, but they took their wins as signs of their brilliance and a mandate to do whatever the hell they liked.
Just to be patochial, both strongly opposed to Scottish indy, both widely despised in the land of the swamp-dwelling monster.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
They've been outdated for 50 years FFS.
They may be outdated and irrelevant to 'the world', but not to the people who enjoy Last Night of the Proms. That's the point.
I know, the reason why it's come up now is BLM.
Actually I don't think BLM is responsible, its the Beeb using BLM as a cover to cleanse things it's never liked.
If you had actually followed the story you'd know that the impetus came from the musical folk in charge of setting and managing the programme. But doubtless you feel better just blaming the BBC.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
I don't really care tbh. I might watch the last night if there's nothing else on.
It's the principle that matters. One day they might ban something I do care about. I doubt it'll be happening again until a vaccine is rolled out, but bonfire night is one of my favourite nights of the year. The professionally offended wouldn't like some of the stuff that goes on at Lewes.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
I'm not sure that 'both sides' need to be taken in to account here. The 'other side' doesn't need to watch the concert. Nobody asks UKIP supporters and members of bowls clubs what they would or wouldn't like to see on the programmes of gay pride celebrations, melas, or the Notting Hill Carnival. It doesn't matter what they think, because they won't go or watch.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
I don't think the defence of "people not watching wont be offended" works, though, does it? I wont insult you by suggesting other examples. The test is simply whether the content is offensive or not. Given that public money is involved (via the BBC) raises the bar IMO.
Who is to say what is offensive?
I thought that was Twitter's motto, with the word 'us' added after the question mark.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
I agree, but without an audience will be a different atmosphere. Indeed quite the metaphor for the end of Empire. The band cranks up the old tunes, but no one to hear.
Millions of people watch the Last Night of the Proms in their homes and tickets are always sold out.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.
Who are you to demand what “should” be done?
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
I didn’t demand just suggested that it should be, same with the farcity cricket at Lords and Rugby at Twickenham.
Does the popularity of these events not “suggest” to you that there remains a place for them? What’s with people these days feeling it’s their right to “suggest” to other people how they should and shouldn’t spend their leisure time and money. It’s not like a rowing race or rugby match exploits slaves like at the colosseum. Get over yourself.
Who said anything about slaves? Why should Oxbridge have these privileges over other universities?
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.
Boris Johnson wouldn't quit for years - he doesn't want to be a PM who was only in post for less than 2 years. Look how May grimly hung on until she passed the 3 year mark.
I wonder what would have happened if black men with guns had attempted to break into the state house.
Absolutely. The degree of tolerance given to these gun totting lunatics is just bizarre.
No matter the history of the nation and why they have the gun rules they have, I will never understand why so many americans love guns as much as they do, where it genuinely seems to be more important than any other issue and mean that they should be able to take and use their guns absolutlely everywhere. Even with a small number of people having a lot of guns and that skewing the average, the tolerance of the actions of those people just beggars belief.
Bruno Macaes argues that American culture is dominated by 'stories' and individual Americans' attitudes by a perception that they are each starring in the film of their own life. He suggests that the emotional attachment to guns arises not so much from the usually argued 'rights and freedoms' but because, in the back of their mind they have a storyline in which life delivers them the chance to become the movie hero who sees off the terrorist or armed robber. The fact that most of them rarely get the gun out of the drawer is by the by.
Interesting. Although I wonder if American culture is more dominated by stories than any other, maybe it's just the kind of stories that dominate. The difference between Breaking Bad and The Great British Bake Off. "Baking Bad" might make a good TV Show.
I also seem to remember that when the gun is taken out of the drawer it is way more likely to be used on the gun-owner or a member of the same household, than it is on any bad guy or intruder.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
The bizarreness to me is that it's the last night of the Proms. One night....
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
The boat race should be the final of an inter university competition in which all universities can take part.
Who are you to demand what “should” be done?
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
I didn’t demand just suggested that it should be, same with the farcity cricket at Lords and Rugby at Twickenham.
Does the popularity of these events not “suggest” to you that there remains a place for them? What’s with people these days feeling it’s their right to “suggest” to other people how they should and shouldn’t spend their leisure time and money. It’s not like a rowing race or rugby match exploits slaves like at the colosseum. Get over yourself.
Who said anything about slaves? Why should Oxbridge have these privileges over other universities?
They don't, there is nothing to stop any other two universities from challenging each other to an annual rowing match and I imagine the Thames would be made available for the appropriate fee.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
I don't really care tbh. I might watch the last night if there's nothing else on.
It's the principle that matters. One day they might ban something I do care about. I doubt it'll be happening again until a vaccine is rolled out, but bonfire night is one of my favourite nights of the year. The professionally offended wouldn't like some of the stuff that goes on at Lewes.
I used to live in E. Sussex. The bonfire societies are/were awesome. Those offended by the historic content would be a long way back in the queue behind the health and safety contingent.
A few years ago there were clips of a performance from Berlin of the last night of the Proms, with a soprano singing Rule Britannia whilst dressed in a Union Jack corset.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
I am not at all given to affecting outrage on other people's behalf, but I can see a little difficulty in being ok about a song proclaiming in 1740 that Britons never shall be slaves, when in the same year the (crown colony of) South Carolina Slave Code prohibited slaves from gathering without white supervision, learning to read and write, and growing their own food, and empowered their owners to whip, mutilate and castrate them on grounds of insubordination and general attitude.
Since you don't want to affect outrage on other people's behalf, shall I discount your outrage until those people affect it themselves?
Regardless, if people want to get into a debate about the actual contents and context of the specific song that's fine, I was personally just chuckling at the rather broad implication that its being outdated and irrelevant was a reason to junk it. You can probably find a great many less offensive (to you) songs which are outdated and irrelevant, if that is the test we are applying now.
I cannot say I recall the last time I saw Last Night of the Proms, but your explanation of your dislike of the song seems to suggest that anything from the period of slavery which references, for example, freedom, must be scrubbed, on the basis that it is hypocritical. First target, the US constitution?
If it were true he knows he'd instantly be a lame duck if he admitted it. cf. MRD.
I posted about this a week or two ago. Seems highly plausible to me. He needs 6 months to cement brexit and to be able to stay he faced off covid until a vaccine was delivered. And will hope that he feels better by then. But Plan B is clearly already being formed in case not. Full leadership election or a coronation for Rishi?
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
They've been outdated for 50 years FFS.
Songs, poems, plays and stories that contain words that originally were of their time are regularly re-interpreted for today without taking a poleaxe to them.
In fact, that's already happening in reverse by the detractors because they're assuming "Britons never never never shall be slaves" is a reference to the transatlantic slave trade, whereas in fact it was a defiant call of the distinctiveness of Britain in moving toward constitutional monarchy, in contrast to Royal absolutism in Europe, and an exhortation to fund the navy properly to defend Britain against it.
It gained currency during the War of the Austrian Succession, when Britain was at war with both France and Spain, who are the "tyrants" referred to within it.
Of course it isn't a *reference* to that trade, nobody says that, but it's a bit unfortunate in the context of that trade. Like setting fire to £20 notes in front of beggars.
On the proms, what’s a little odd is the BBC apparently choosing to take sides on the brewing culture wars. Regardless of what people might claim, hardly anyone takes any notice of the proms. But once the spotlight of public attention was shone on this, why didnt the Beeb just say they’d always had plans for a soloist this year? It’s actually extraordinary that the Beeb have not backed down because it’s a trigger issue for the most important chunk of their customer base.
It reminds me a bit of how the over 50s have been trained by covid into ditching complacent businesses for online shopping instead. Same is likely to happen with the bbc. They’re taking their audience for granted, because they think the over 50s will never get themselves over the line to cancel their license and rely on Prime/Netflix/ITV Player/Youtube etc... I wouldn’t be so sure.
The media coverage of the next uk election should be quite tasty, the way the beeb is going it will be an existential one for them.
They haven’t taken sides they have done what they always do, try and reflect both sides of opinion thereby upsetting both. It’s daft that people are arguing about tunes that either started life with No words or different words and who’s meaning were different then as to now, best to play the tunes and let people put their own words to them. I was in a crowd one night in our local town when the Spanish national anthem, which has no (official) words with the people on one side of me singing one version, pro Franco, and on the other singing another.
Was there a debate raging over the proms that the BBC reacted to? If so, I certainly missed it.
According to the newspapers there was.
As per @Luckyguy1983 I am sure the BLM lot watch the proms every year without fail...
It’s nothing to do with BLM the words to the songs are just outdated and irrelevant in today’s world.
What?! A historical song is outdated and irrelevant, why I never. I've always said all songs and media must be relevant for today's world, otherwise they should be junked.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
I think we should all care.
The detractors aren't thinking this through: it's a short-step from censoring traditional patriotic songs to attacking all patriotic celebrations of Britishness, and then you undermine the British state and Britain itself.
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.
So the issue cannot be politically partisan.
If you're white, and you're currently finding this difficult, or are on the fence, what's more likely to bring you on board? Finding a way to add to what we already have, by putting up new statues, and finding new things to celebrate too (thus achieving a better balance, and thus integration and unity across all races), or to pull them down, cancel songs, censor heroes and insist there's white history (shameful) and black history (to be celebrated).
If you do the latter the risk is that some white people will move from being on the fence to starting to see black people as a threat to their culture, heritage and identity, and you'll get a very nasty backlash.
I can't thing of anything more likely to fuel racial division, rather than unity, than following the proscriptions of ignorant white liberals.
If it were true he knows he'd instantly be a lame duck if he admitted it. cf. MRD.
I posted about this a week or two ago. Seems highly plausible to me. He needs 6 months to cement brexit and to be able to stay he faced off covid until a vaccine was delivered. And will hope that he feels better by then. But Plan B is clearly already being formed in case not. Full leadership election or a coronation for Rishi?
Sunak, the unproven chancellor, that’s a bit of a risk. As to wether he would carry the membership is another question.
Comments
Arnie was a special case - Gray Davis, the Democrat, had just been recalled and this was a special election
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/24/uks-national-interest-joe-biden-wins-presidential-race/
https://twitter.com/ceprdc/status/1297983276737613829
Always insist on open data and third-party verification of models before supporting a fascist coup d'état.
The xenopbia works, the fear of the "socialist" that is Biden, touches a nerve and the industrial scale cheating planned for November could pull Trump across the line easily.
And given that it's designed to ensure Trump supporters vote they will believe it...
Thet thought they had lost until Florida came in
Both their election wins were substantially down to the failings of their opponents, but they took their wins as signs of their brilliance and a mandate to do whatever the hell they liked.
Now, I am sure some will put that down to the industrial-style cheating the GOP is planning for November, including decapitating the USPS etc etc but it might be worth stepping back and thinking why Trump and the Republicans are not running around like headless chickens, especially given the personal issues involved for Trump.
Even I might consider a hour on a treadmill rather than read another of her articles.
Frankly, if the Last Night sticks in the craw of the BBC, give it to another broadcaster. I don't see why the people who like it should be denied a single night of unabashed (if silly) patriotic celebration. It's pathetically puritanical and moralistic.
Interesting note - one of his big actions (for the time) was converting his Humvee to electric. There was a small, but thriving (and very expensive) electrify-your-car market in California at the time, run by a group of car customisation shops. 6 figure costs, with top end tech.
It was the performance of the these conversions that kicked off what became Tesla - which was based on the idea "How cheap can it get, if we take the high end electrification tech, building it into a car designed for it and get it into production?"
Everything will be back in full next year (vaccine permitting):
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-53895000
Also from the outside I don't really know how you'd be able to differentiate between Trump running around like a headless chicken and Trump acting normally, it's not like he's a model of decorum and consistency.
Of course it is the symbolism - bit like the crowd of enthusiastic folk who want the Boat Race cancelled.
Perhaps I should start a campaign to ban all the things I don't like?
Gray Davis enabled Enron to hold California to ransom over power rates and a number of other stupidities. Essentially he tried triangulation on just about everything - and upset *everyone*.
The GOP response to Biden's speech gave a good impression of a decapitated fowl.
I think that Trump might win for all sorts of reasons (voter suppression, Covid suddenly fizzles out, shy Trump voters etc) but the demeanour of the GOP is not a good indicator. They have to appear confident no matter what - even if Trump himself isn't.
The Proms in their current form are a BBC thing. Yes, there's the lineage back to Henry Wood, but without the BBC there's nothing for another broadcaster to broadcast. They're planned by BBC people, and the main performers are BBC orchestras.
There's nothing stopping Sky or Classic FM broadcasting an evening concert of patriotic songs, apart from orchestras being awfully expensive things and live classical music being a bit of a niche market. So bluntly, no BBC, no Proms.
And besides, the pathetic moralism is just as likely on the side of the Beeb bashers. This year, the last night won't have a big raucous audience, so the usual Last Night fun would look and sound a bit pathetic, like wearing a clown suit to choral evensong. There's also a fair question about whether this is a year to have this particular bit of fun, or whether- like in 2001- we need something a bit different.
Artistically, they've probably got it about right.
Ohio, final polling average Trump 2% ahead. Actual vote Trump 8% ahead
Wisconsin Clinton 6%, Trump won by 0.8%
PA Clinton 4% ahead, Trump won by 0.6%
Michigan Clinton 4%, Trump won by 0.4%
With 50 states you would expect a few outliers, but these are all more or less "mid-west", with some demographic similarities so clearly no coincidence.
I remember analysis suggesting the biggest factor was late deciders breaking heavily for Trump, rather than "shy Trumpers".
I wonder if the polls were also missing a specifically anti-Clinton vote, as the polling for the Michigan Democrat primary which Sanders unexpectedly won, was way out.
In any case, I think someone on here posted something which weakly suggested that historically than can be a tendency for polls to be out in the opposite direction to the last election, as pollsters try to adjust for the error and end up over-compensating. Personally, I just assume that there is a 50% chance of the polls being out in either direction.
BUT I think the discrepancy between Trump's Betfair odds and eg the current 538 forecast is less to do with trying to guess how the polling is wrong, and much more to do with the uncertainty in how people might change their minds between now and November.
On the one hand, there are not so many undecideds, the polling has been quite stable for a few weeks, and the disapproval ratings for the last 3.5 years suggest that people have already made up their minds, and therefore Trump has a mountain to climb.
On the other hand, there might be relatively better economic news coming before the election. And relatively better coronavirus news coming (of course, these 2 things are connected). So the polling is only going to move one way, and Trump might have a good chance of winning.
I don't know, but I've got to be optimistic that enough people have already made up their minds about Trump, and nothing is going to change their minds in the next weeks. And Trump himself probably isn't capable of doing anything except playing to his base, and it won't be enough.
Thing is, let's imagine you were a fundamental Christian whose flavour of belief held that homosexuality was a sin. You are deeply offended by all things which reference or "promote" homosexuality. The BBC features its usual Pride celebrations which offends you. So you don't watch it. All is good, right?
Who is to say what is offensive?
I do wonder though whether the death toll will be believed in a post-truth era. In any normal time I'm sure that Trump would be facing a record defeat for his fatal bungling over Covid.
A bunch of ludicrous 12d chess players who repeatedly ignored on the ground reports and canvassing to direct resources away from where they were needed.
If any senior campaigner from 201y is involved in 2020 Biden is fucked and deserves to be fucked.
https://twitter.com/Kevin_Maguire/status/1298171618288705536?s=20
They represent about 10-20% of the electorate, at best.
There is already an inter university rowing regatta by the way.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/24/health/fda-blood-plasma.html
I am as about as unpatriotic as you can get, but I love the last night of the proms. People getting together, enjoying themselves, being silly and having a good sing song. Must admit I don't think much about the words or history of it, other than it is a nice tradition (like pantomimes or silly stuff other nationalities do which I also enjoy).
And after all it is not as if those attending are rubbing their British nationalism in the face of others since every flag under the sun is normally on display and with oodles of EU flags to boot.
Bunch of emotionally retarded man children armed with assault weapons invade seats of government - nada.
You can see why a society might adopt the mindset that it's better to have guns. And why skin lightening agents are big business.
And remarkable people only noticed it for the first time now.
CHB is right to not care about this Proms business, but my word it has been entertaining to watch people bitch at it from each side.
In fact, that's already happening in reverse by the detractors because they're assuming "Britons never never never shall be slaves" is a reference to the transatlantic slave trade, whereas in fact it was a defiant call of the distinctiveness of Britain in moving toward constitutional monarchy, in contrast to Royal absolutism in Europe, and an exhortation to fund the navy properly to defend Britain against it.
It gained currency during the War of the Austrian Succession, when Britain was at war with both France and Spain, who are the "tyrants" referred to within it.
https://twitter.com/AgentP22/status/1298173616736088070?s=20
It's the principle that matters. One day they might ban something I do care about. I doubt it'll be happening again until a vaccine is rolled out, but bonfire night is one of my favourite nights of the year. The professionally offended wouldn't like some of the stuff that goes on at Lewes.
I also seem to remember that when the gun is taken out of the drawer it is way more likely to be used on the gun-owner or a member of the same household, than it is on any bad guy or intruder.
I have so far only found this clip from Hamburg with Rule Britannia at 3.09. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4tsW7TTQ4Y
Regardless, if people want to get into a debate about the actual contents and context of the specific song that's fine, I was personally just chuckling at the rather broad implication that its being outdated and irrelevant was a reason to junk it. You can probably find a great many less offensive (to you) songs which are outdated and irrelevant, if that is the test we are applying now.
I cannot say I recall the last time I saw Last Night of the Proms, but your explanation of your dislike of the song seems to suggest that anything from the period of slavery which references, for example, freedom, must be scrubbed, on the basis that it is hypocritical. First target, the US constitution?
The detractors aren't thinking this through: it's a short-step from censoring traditional patriotic songs to attacking all patriotic celebrations of Britishness, and then you undermine the British state and Britain itself.
What's needed right now is a better understanding of the discrimination faced by many Black people, and for everyone to support bringing them into the fold as equal citizens of a confident proud modern Britain.
So the issue cannot be politically partisan.
If you're white, and you're currently finding this difficult, or are on the fence, what's more likely to bring you on board? Finding a way to add to what we already have, by putting up new statues, and finding new things to celebrate too (thus achieving a better balance, and thus integration and unity across all races), or to pull them down, cancel songs, censor heroes and insist there's white history (shameful) and black history (to be celebrated).
If you do the latter the risk is that some white people will move from being on the fence to starting to see black people as a threat to their culture, heritage and identity, and you'll get a very nasty backlash.
I can't thing of anything more likely to fuel racial division, rather than unity, than following the proscriptions of ignorant white liberals.