Rishi still favourite to be next PM though not as strong a one as he was – politicalbetting.com

System

Rishi still favourite to be next PM though not as strong a one as he was – politicalbetting.com

The biggest current political betting market that I have an interest (I’ve £20 on Sunak at 250/1) is who is going to succeed Johnson as prime minister. The Betdata.io chart above shows what has happened on Betfair over the past 12-month and ask can be seen Keir starmer was favourite for a period but most of the time it is the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rishi Sunak, who has been in the top slot.

Read the full story here

DavidL

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

turbotubbs

2nd again...

Unrealistic figures right now. Wait until the crisis moves from medical to financial...

DavidL

SKS is surprisingly low. Presumably most think that Boris will hand over the reins to another Tory rather than lose an election. That is probably right but it doesn't exactly smack of powerful opposition.

rottenborough

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

The bond markets may do for him long before Johnson stands down. Someone will need to take one for the team.

CorrectHorseBattery

https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1372816391296798720

This is not going to be smooth sailing

DavidL

rottenborough said:

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

The bond markets may do for him long before Johnson stands down. Someone will need to take one for the team.

The bond market is completely rigged by QE and the buying of gilts by the BoE. If any other market trader behaved anything like the way that HMG does the FCA would be all over them. That said, there have been hints that people are starting to think that governments should pay a bit more for the moolah that they mooch from the markets. An increase in the cost of borrowing would be very serious for UK plc given our current imbalances and very probably fatal for the Chancellor.

rottenborough

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

rottenborough

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

The bond markets may do for him long before Johnson stands down. Someone will need to take one for the team.

The bond market is completely rigged by QE and the buying of gilts by the BoE. If any other market trader behaved anything like the way that HMG does the FCA would be all over them. That said, there have been hints that people are starting to think that governments should pay a bit more for the moolah that they mooch from the markets. An increase in the cost of borrowing would be very serious for UK plc given our current imbalances and very probably fatal for the Chancellor.

US 10-year government bonds up since January. There's trouble looming.

Gadfly

Meanwhile, in the crazy world of Scottish politics, Salmond is apparently guilty, despite a verdict of innocence, and Sturgeon is apparently innocent despite a finding of guilt.

Casino_Royale

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I did warn you.

Sadly, I fear Labour has made almost precisely no progress.

This is not a good thing, and I disagree with Labour (vehmently) on virtually everything.

noneoftheabove

DavidL said:

SKS is surprisingly low. Presumably most think that Boris will hand over the reins to another Tory rather than lose an election. That is probably right but it doesn't exactly smack of powerful opposition.

Its a bit more complicated. Its the related contingency that if Starmer is looking like becoming PM then Johnson will be asked to step down or moved on. So for Starmer to be next PM, he has to look like an outsider but win on the day.

No_Offence_Alan

Gadfly said:

Meanwhile, in the crazy world of Scottish politics, Salmond is apparently guilty, despite a verdict of innocence, and Sturgeon is apparently innocent despite a finding of guilt.

Trump was acquitted twice in both his impeachments.

Casino_Royale

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

Dura_Ace

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

Andy_JS said:

I'm happy with both types of places.

I've got eight cars, enough bits to make another eight, twenty bikes, enough bits to make another twenty and two motorbikes so unless I come into oligarch money it's country living for me - split between Zumerzet and Bretagne.

I would like an apartment on La Canebière in Marseille but Mrs DA does not share my deep and abiding love of la cité phocéenne.

Genuine question: how do you accommodate (still less afford) all of that?

How big is your house?

I afford it all the same way as every other rich Leninist affords anything - inheritance. Mrs DA earns a pretty penny overcharging for cosmetic dentistry too.

We've got a 4 bed stone farmhouse with two stone barns. One's a workshop and the others for storage.

The house in France is a smaller new build but its on a 20ha terrain.

Casino_Royale

Dura_Ace said:

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

Andy_JS said:

I'm happy with both types of places.

I've got eight cars, enough bits to make another eight, twenty bikes, enough bits to make another twenty and two motorbikes so unless I come into oligarch money it's country living for me - split between Zumerzet and Bretagne.

I would like an apartment on La Canebière in Marseille but Mrs DA does not share my deep and abiding love of la cité phocéenne.

Genuine question: how do you accommodate (still less afford) all of that?

How big is your house?

I afford it all the same way as every other rich Leninist affords anything - inheritance. Mrs DA earns a pretty penny overcharging for cosmetic dentistry too.

We've got a 4 bed stone farmhouse with two stone barns. One's a workshop and the others for storage.

The house in France is a smaller new build but its on a 20ha terrain.

Sounds nice. And, you'll be comfortable with the Red Guard taking that and all your toys away come the Revolution too?

TOPPING

fpt

NickPalmer said:

Casino_Royale said:

rcs1000 said:

As an aside, I loathe both the countryside and small towns.

I really can't see why anyone would want to live in a place with less than about half a million people.

I have the precise opposite view to you.

I'm with rcs - for work reasons live in a quiet lane in Godalming, a small town which has supermarkets and estate agents as the most prominent businesses. There's nothing wrong with it but there was very little to do even pre-pandemic - no cinema, no night clubs, no galleries, few concerts, few ethnic restaurants, one amateur theatre. I miss Holloway a lot and hope to retire to a city in due course.

It's just as well we don't all want to live in the same place, of course!

Must be tricky with few ethnic restaurants. Perhaps there aren't enough ethnics in Godalming?

NickPalmer

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

MarqueeMark

DavidL said:

SKS is surprisingly low. Presumably most think that Boris will hand over the reins to another Tory rather than lose an election. That is probably right but it doesn't exactly smack of powerful opposition.

More an acknowledgment that the Tories will prise power from Boris's hands if he looks like he has turned into a loser. They are brutal like that.

Starmer travelling from 37% to 19% in his honeymoon period tells you all you need to know about his chances.

TOPPING

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

Would you class the Godalming Pizza Express as an ethnic restaurant, Nick?

tlg86

Casino_Royale said:

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

The comments BTL are instructive (keep the Tories out of power for good, etc.).

Stocky

Dura_Ace said:

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

Andy_JS said:

I'm happy with both types of places.

I've got eight cars, enough bits to make another eight, twenty bikes, enough bits to make another twenty and two motorbikes so unless I come into oligarch money it's country living for me - split between Zumerzet and Bretagne.

I would like an apartment on La Canebière in Marseille but Mrs DA does not share my deep and abiding love of la cité phocéenne.

Genuine question: how do you accommodate (still less afford) all of that?

How big is your house?

I afford it all the same way as every other rich Leninist affords anything - inheritance. Mrs DA earns a pretty penny overcharging for cosmetic dentistry too.

We've got a 4 bed stone farmhouse with two stone barns. One's a workshop and the others for storage.

The house in France is a smaller new build but its on a 20ha terrain.

I've recently has a dental implant which the NHS refused to pay for. NHS was proposing that a gap remains in my mouth. Fuck that. The implant cost me £3,500. One tooth! Amazing procedure though. The whole thing took a year.

tlg86

Off-topic, I see that the CDU/CSU are slipping in the polls:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2021_German_federal_election

MaxPB

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

It's not going to be as high as that, I think we'll top out at £295-300bn. At least based on today's figures, it will probably get revised down over the next few months as the government figures out things weren't as bad as predicted.

What's interesting is that the January growth figures ae already better than what the OBR figures implied and the Feb indicators show in improving picture compared to that. We could well be in a position in November where the OBR is raising the economic outlook and slashing the amount of debt.

It looks to me as though we might never really go above 100% net debt on the PSNDex measure as the economy is expected to grow very rapidly from April to June and recover a significant amount of the lost ground for this lockdown.

MarqueeMark

Casino_Royale said:

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

Or it could find itself a Blair 2.0 - although (s)he probably isn't in Westminster yet.

TheWhiteRabbit

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

Not sure I understand the ONS on this point.

The OBR revised down their est from £394 to £355bn three weeks ago.

Current borrowing is £278.8bn plus an estimated £24bn in write offs from the gov't loan scheme - let's call it £300bn.

One month to go and we're expected to borrow £54bn?

More likely around £20bn which would leave total borrowing for the year at "only" £320bn. Or £80bn less than forecast four months ago.

Selebian

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1372816391296798720

This is not going to be smooth sailing

Very odd graph to illustrate the point - doesn't include the recent increase, only runs to Sep 18, and does show that 2% is historically very low.

MaxPB

CorrectHorseBattery said:

https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1372816391296798720

This is not going to be smooth sailing

The BoE pays the treasury interest by way of the APF, I'm not sure how critical this really is.

Nigel_Foremain

Stocky said:

Dura_Ace said:

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

Andy_JS said:

I'm happy with both types of places.

I've got eight cars, enough bits to make another eight, twenty bikes, enough bits to make another twenty and two motorbikes so unless I come into oligarch money it's country living for me - split between Zumerzet and Bretagne.

I would like an apartment on La Canebière in Marseille but Mrs DA does not share my deep and abiding love of la cité phocéenne.

Genuine question: how do you accommodate (still less afford) all of that?

How big is your house?

I afford it all the same way as every other rich Leninist affords anything - inheritance. Mrs DA earns a pretty penny overcharging for cosmetic dentistry too.

We've got a 4 bed stone farmhouse with two stone barns. One's a workshop and the others for storage.

The house in France is a smaller new build but its on a 20ha terrain.

I've recently has a dental implant which the NHS refused to pay for. NHS was proposing that a gap remains in my mouth. Fuck that. The implant cost me £3,500. One tooth! Amazing procedure though. The whole thing took a year.

That's a long time to sit in a dentist's chair!

TheWhiteRabbit

Incidentally even a modest reduction in borrowing or improvement in GDP might be enough to keep debt below the symbolic level of 100% of GDP, perhaps into next year as well.

I think the OBR's forecast of £219.3bn next year looks very high.

Dura_Ace

Casino_Royale said:

And, you'll be comfortable with the Red Guard taking that and all your toys away come the Revolution too?

I am the Red Guard. The parish council are getting it on Day One.

MaxPB

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Incidentally even a modest reduction in borrowing or improvement in GDP might be enough to keep debt below the symbolic level of 100% of GDP, perhaps into next year as well.

I think the OBR's forecast of £219.3bn next year looks very high.

Yes, it strikes me as extremely unlikely given the rapid fall of in virus spending expected from April once furlough usage drops and then falls off a cliff in May and June as the nation opens up. Around half of that figure makes sense.

Stocky

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

@NickPalmer Sounds like you are a multi-cultural type rather than a melting pot type. Personally, I don't care for any of these group divides with, for example, Sikhs congregating together. Skin colour, religion - who cares? I guess that's liberalism v collectivism. You collectivists sure do like your groups.

A friend of mine who lives in a small town in Leicestershire laments the diversity of Leicester (which he has long-ceased venturing into - it may as well be the moon). He says (inevitably) that he's not racist, "as long as "they" come nowhere near me"! The fearsome "they". Never "we".

MarqueeMark

Casino_Royale said:

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

I will get round to finishing the header I'm working on, but Hartlepool will likely add to Labour's woes on just how and where to fight the next election. Essentially, if you say the Tories and Labour are each going to put resources into 100 seats, the Tories can put that into 80 on defence and 20 on offence. Labour has to put it into 100 on attack - and even then, they have to leapfrog some of their low-hanging fruit and go for medium-difficult targets. And unless fortunes change dramatically for the SNP, it won't be in Scotland.

Labour has to hope that the political tide goes so far in their favour that it swamps the Tory defences.

Or accept that they will not win power in less than 2 attempts.

IanB2

CNN: The worsening situation in Europe is becoming a cautionary tale for the United States. The variant causing a renewed crisis across the continent is also spreading fast in the US. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has projected it will become the dominant strain in the United States by the end of this month or early April.

But there is another reason why US experts are worried about what is happening in Europe right now. Germany, France, Italy and Spain all avoided the huge spikes in infections that had paralyzed the United Kingdom after the Christmas holiday. Their infection levels were either stable or or showing signs of decline just a few weeks ago. With vaccination rollouts starting, albeit slowly, across the continent, people were starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

But while the trends looked promising, the case numbers were still very high. And that became a major problem when the new wave started -- making the new lockdowns necessary, Grimaldi said. "It's not easy to do lockdowns, because of the economic despair it brings ... the life style change it brings," he said. "But they are indispensable in trying to make the virus stop."

He said that data from a recent study by the University in Bologna has shown that the most stringent lockdown measures, refered to as "the red zones" in Italy do work -- leading to as much as 91% drop in number of Covid-related deaths.

A delay in the decision to impose lockdowns can be deadly. The Resolution Foundation, a British think tank, said Thursday that an extra 27,000 people died of Covid-19 because the government delayed the start of the country's latest lockdown until January, despite evidence of fast rising cases in December.

American public health officials are worried the US is heading in the same direction -- with some states starting to ease up on safety measures even as case numbers remain high. "When you see a plateau at a level as high as 60,000 cases a day, that is a very vulnerable time to have a surge, to go back up. That's what exactly happened in Europe," Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told CNN.

squareroot2

Nigel_Foremain said:

Stocky said:

Dura_Ace said:

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

Andy_JS said:

I'm happy with both types of places.

I've got eight cars, enough bits to make another eight, twenty bikes, enough bits to make another twenty and two motorbikes so unless I come into oligarch money it's country living for me - split between Zumerzet and Bretagne.

I would like an apartment on La Canebière in Marseille but Mrs DA does not share my deep and abiding love of la cité phocéenne.

Genuine question: how do you accommodate (still less afford) all of that?

How big is your house?

I afford it all the same way as every other rich Leninist affords anything - inheritance. Mrs DA earns a pretty penny overcharging for cosmetic dentistry too.

We've got a 4 bed stone farmhouse with two stone barns. One's a workshop and the others for storage.

The house in France is a smaller new build but its on a 20ha terrain.

I've recently has a dental implant which the NHS refused to pay for. NHS was proposing that a gap remains in my mouth. Fuck that. The implant cost me £3,500. One tooth! Amazing procedure though. The whole thing took a year.

That's a long time to sit in a dentist's chair!

Thats v expensive. There is a guy in Hove aiming who does nothing but implants and was knocking them out at a grand a time.. no idea what it us now but it will not be 3.5k ..I would be amazed if it was....

Dura_Ace

On topic.. I can't see value in the Snake as next PM. If the Johnson Project explodes then his willowy frame will definitely be in the blast radius. If Johnson endures then the Snake will become tarnished and eventually shuffled out.

squareroot2

Casino_Royale said:

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

When they stop electing duffers as leader...

IanB2

Stocky said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

@NickPalmer Sounds like you are a multi-cultural type rather than a melting pot type. Personally, I don't care for any of these group divides with, for example, Sikhs congregating together. Skin colour, religion - who cares? I guess that's liberalism v collectivism. You collectivists sure do like your groups.

A friend of mine who lives in a small town in Leicestershire laments the diversity of Leicester (which he has long-ceased venturing into - it may as well be the moon). He says (inevitably) that he's not racist, "as long as "they" come nowhere near me"! The fearsome "they". Never "we".

He's more probably lamenting the lack of diversity in Leicester?

IanB2

squareroot2 said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Stocky said:

Dura_Ace said:

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

Andy_JS said:

I'm happy with both types of places.

I've got eight cars, enough bits to make another eight, twenty bikes, enough bits to make another twenty and two motorbikes so unless I come into oligarch money it's country living for me - split between Zumerzet and Bretagne.

I would like an apartment on La Canebière in Marseille but Mrs DA does not share my deep and abiding love of la cité phocéenne.

Genuine question: how do you accommodate (still less afford) all of that?

How big is your house?

I afford it all the same way as every other rich Leninist affords anything - inheritance. Mrs DA earns a pretty penny overcharging for cosmetic dentistry too.

We've got a 4 bed stone farmhouse with two stone barns. One's a workshop and the others for storage.

The house in France is a smaller new build but its on a 20ha terrain.

I've recently has a dental implant which the NHS refused to pay for. NHS was proposing that a gap remains in my mouth. Fuck that. The implant cost me £3,500. One tooth! Amazing procedure though. The whole thing took a year.

That's a long time to sit in a dentist's chair!

Thats v expensive. There is a guy in Hove aiming who does nothing but implants and was knocking them out at a grand a time.. no idea what it us now but it will not be 3.5k ..I would be amazed if it was....

Or, in earlier times, you could travel to Hungary or Turkey and have the treatment plus a holiday for less than you'd pay just for the treatment at home.

Stocky

IanB2 said:

Stocky said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

@NickPalmer Sounds like you are a multi-cultural type rather than a melting pot type. Personally, I don't care for any of these group divides with, for example, Sikhs congregating together. Skin colour, religion - who cares? I guess that's liberalism v collectivism. You collectivists sure do like your groups.

A friend of mine who lives in a small town in Leicestershire laments the diversity of Leicester (which he has long-ceased venturing into - it may as well be the moon). He says (inevitably) that he's not racist, "as long as "they" come nowhere near me"! The fearsome "they". Never "we".

He's more probably lamenting the lack of diversity in Leicester?

He's referring to the Asian British population in the city of Leicester.

MarqueeMark

Just discovered that the land in my village was, before 1066, held by Asgar the Cramped.

So just a shit name from a video game then.....

IanB2

Stocky said:

IanB2 said:

Stocky said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

@NickPalmer Sounds like you are a multi-cultural type rather than a melting pot type. Personally, I don't care for any of these group divides with, for example, Sikhs congregating together. Skin colour, religion - who cares? I guess that's liberalism v collectivism. You collectivists sure do like your groups.

A friend of mine who lives in a small town in Leicestershire laments the diversity of Leicester (which he has long-ceased venturing into - it may as well be the moon). He says (inevitably) that he's not racist, "as long as "they" come nowhere near me"! The fearsome "they". Never "we".

He's more probably lamenting the lack of diversity in Leicester?

He's referring to the Asian British population in the city of Leicester.

I suspect that Leicester, like my old part of London in Redbridge, is progressively becoming less diverse. In East London it isn't just that white british people are moving away; each census showed that every other ethnic category other than South Asian, including Jewish, Black, and Chinese, were on the decline. (edit/ excepting a transient population of eastern Europeans)

Balrog

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

tlg86

IanB2 said:

CNN: The worsening situation in Europe is becoming a cautionary tale for the United States. The variant causing a renewed crisis across the continent is also spreading fast in the US. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has projected it will become the dominant strain in the United States by the end of this month or early April.

But there is another reason why US experts are worried about what is happening in Europe right now. Germany, France, Italy and Spain all avoided the huge spikes in infections that had paralyzed the United Kingdom after the Christmas holiday. Their infection levels were either stable or or showing signs of decline just a few weeks ago. With vaccination rollouts starting, albeit slowly, across the continent, people were starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel.

But while the trends looked promising, the case numbers were still very high. And that became a major problem when the new wave started -- making the new lockdowns necessary, Grimaldi said. "It's not easy to do lockdowns, because of the economic despair it brings ... the life style change it brings," he said. "But they are indispensable in trying to make the virus stop."

He said that data from a recent study by the University in Bologna has shown that the most stringent lockdown measures, refered to as "the red zones" in Italy do work -- leading to as much as 91% drop in number of Covid-related deaths.

A delay in the decision to impose lockdowns can be deadly. The Resolution Foundation, a British think tank, said Thursday that an extra 27,000 people died of Covid-19 because the government delayed the start of the country's latest lockdown until January, despite evidence of fast rising cases in December.

American public health officials are worried the US is heading in the same direction -- with some states starting to ease up on safety measures even as case numbers remain high. "When you see a plateau at a level as high as 60,000 cases a day, that is a very vulnerable time to have a surge, to go back up. That's what exactly happened in Europe," Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told CNN.

There is absolutely no chance of a further lockdown in the US.

TheScreamingEagles

https://twitter.com/theresecoffey/status/1372845831288655872

TheScreamingEagles

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

Scott_xP

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

Does she have the necessary support?

Charles

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

The bond markets may do for him long before Johnson stands down. Someone will need to take one for the team.

The bond market is completely rigged by QE and the buying of gilts by the BoE. If any other market trader behaved anything like the way that HMG does the FCA would be all over them. That said, there have been hints that people are starting to think that governments should pay a bit more for the moolah that they mooch from the markets. An increase in the cost of borrowing would be very serious for UK plc given our current imbalances and very probably fatal for the Chancellor.

I've just fixed my mortgage for 7 years at 1.49%...

noneoftheabove

IanB2 said:

Stocky said:

IanB2 said:

Stocky said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

@NickPalmer Sounds like you are a multi-cultural type rather than a melting pot type. Personally, I don't care for any of these group divides with, for example, Sikhs congregating together. Skin colour, religion - who cares? I guess that's liberalism v collectivism. You collectivists sure do like your groups.

A friend of mine who lives in a small town in Leicestershire laments the diversity of Leicester (which he has long-ceased venturing into - it may as well be the moon). He says (inevitably) that he's not racist, "as long as "they" come nowhere near me"! The fearsome "they". Never "we".

He's more probably lamenting the lack of diversity in Leicester?

He's referring to the Asian British population in the city of Leicester.

I suspect that Leicester, like my old part of London in Redbridge, is progressively becoming less diverse. In East London it isn't just that white british people are moving away; each census showed that every other ethnic category other than South Asian, including Jewish, Black, and Chinese, were on the decline. (edit/ excepting a transient population of eastern Europeans)

Important point, diverse is often equated with high BAME population by both sides of the debate, yet there are plenty of non diverse, high BAME areas in cities.

TheScreamingEagles

Scott_xP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

Does she have the necessary support?

I'll explain why on Sunday.

DougSeal

https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1372723752241307648

tlg86

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

What's curious is that Woking and Aldershot are safer seats for the Tories than Surrey South West.

TheScreamingEagles

I believe we all called this as a mistake at the time, surprised it has taken so long to acknowledge because international travel during a pandemic is a huge mistake.

COVID-19: Greece travel corridor brought in 'a large amount of virus', say UK experts

The study is likely to reignite the debate about travel corridors - expected to return in some form as restrictions are eased.

https://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-greece-travel-corridor-brought-in-a-large-amount-of-virus-say-uk-experts-12250258

TheWhiteRabbit

Charles said:

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

The bond markets may do for him long before Johnson stands down. Someone will need to take one for the team.

The bond market is completely rigged by QE and the buying of gilts by the BoE. If any other market trader behaved anything like the way that HMG does the FCA would be all over them. That said, there have been hints that people are starting to think that governments should pay a bit more for the moolah that they mooch from the markets. An increase in the cost of borrowing would be very serious for UK plc given our current imbalances and very probably fatal for the Chancellor.

I've just fixed my mortgage for 7 years at 1.49%...

I assume they are market terms Charles

geoffw

Scott_xP said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

Does she have the necessary support?

Is her knee a problem?

noneoftheabove

DougSeal said:

https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1372723752241307648

That drop off in case numbers doesnt actually look much better than their October drop off?

squareroot2

Charles said:

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

The bond markets may do for him long before Johnson stands down. Someone will need to take one for the team.

The bond market is completely rigged by QE and the buying of gilts by the BoE. If any other market trader behaved anything like the way that HMG does the FCA would be all over them. That said, there have been hints that people are starting to think that governments should pay a bit more for the moolah that they mooch from the markets. An increase in the cost of borrowing would be very serious for UK plc given our current imbalances and very probably fatal for the Chancellor.

I've just fixed my mortgage for 7 years at 1.49%...

V sensible

Charles

squareroot2 said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Stocky said:

Dura_Ace said:

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

Andy_JS said:

I'm happy with both types of places.

I've got eight cars, enough bits to make another eight, twenty bikes, enough bits to make another twenty and two motorbikes so unless I come into oligarch money it's country living for me - split between Zumerzet and Bretagne.

I would like an apartment on La Canebière in Marseille but Mrs DA does not share my deep and abiding love of la cité phocéenne.

Genuine question: how do you accommodate (still less afford) all of that?

How big is your house?

I afford it all the same way as every other rich Leninist affords anything - inheritance. Mrs DA earns a pretty penny overcharging for cosmetic dentistry too.

We've got a 4 bed stone farmhouse with two stone barns. One's a workshop and the others for storage.

The house in France is a smaller new build but its on a 20ha terrain.

I've recently has a dental implant which the NHS refused to pay for. NHS was proposing that a gap remains in my mouth. Fuck that. The implant cost me £3,500. One tooth! Amazing procedure though. The whole thing took a year.

That's a long time to sit in a dentist's chair!

Thats v expensive. There is a guy in Hove aiming who does nothing but implants and was knocking them out at a grand a time.. no idea what it us now but it will not be 3.5k ..I would be amazed if it was....

I'm not sure I'd want someone who knocks 'em out looking after my teeth!

Dura_Ace

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

IanB2

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

Woking Pizza Express attracts all sorts

Andy_JS

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

Keep up the insults.

RochdalePioneers

Gadfly said:

Meanwhile, in the crazy world of Scottish politics, Salmond is apparently guilty, despite a verdict of innocence, and Sturgeon is apparently innocent despite a finding of guilt.

Yep. The biggest lie wins, and its easy to win when the picture is so murky and the players hold such a weak position.
1 The (presumably Tories) on the committee have leaked their "finding" that nippie misled Parliament, which fits neatly into her "Nippy misled parliament and Must Resign" campaign started before she gave the evidence the committee now considers to be a lie
2 "There IS a conspiracy by Salmond, his supporters and the opposition to smear us standing up for women" narrative is at least convincing prima facie as the "vast SNP and government conspiracy to get Salmond sent to jail" conspiracy.
3 Sturgeon has been disingenuous at the very least. The problem for her pursuers is that their side appear to have been even more disingenuous. "Sturgeon allegedly lied, she must resign!" say Tories where their own team have demonstrably (not allegedly) told lie after lie and not resigned. Columnists up here are pointing out the double standards being applied to Holyrood and Westminster

I've said all the way through that she will not be demolished or even significantly damaged by this and I'm more convinced of that now. It isn't that lying to parliament is acceptable. It is that standards are so low and the alternative choices even worse so that it doesn't matter the way it once would have done.

Nippy is the real victim here. Apparently...

Charles

TheWhiteRabbit said:

Charles said:

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

The bond markets may do for him long before Johnson stands down. Someone will need to take one for the team.

The bond market is completely rigged by QE and the buying of gilts by the BoE. If any other market trader behaved anything like the way that HMG does the FCA would be all over them. That said, there have been hints that people are starting to think that governments should pay a bit more for the moolah that they mooch from the markets. An increase in the cost of borrowing would be very serious for UK plc given our current imbalances and very probably fatal for the Chancellor.

I've just fixed my mortgage for 7 years at 1.49%...

I assume they are market terms Charles

Barclays...

OldKingCole

MarqueeMark said:

Just discovered that the land in my village was, before 1066, held by Asgar the Cramped.

So just a shit name from a video game then.....

Been on a WEA Zoom course on Icelandic Myth etc. In the saga we looked at yesterday there was a footnote which included the following genealogy: Gudleif was the son of Ari, the son of Mar, the son of Atli, the son of UIf the Squint-Eyed, the son of Hogni the White, the son of Otrygg, the son of Oblaud, the son of King Hjorleif the Lecherous.

SandraMc

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

squareroot2

Charles said:

squareroot2 said:

Nigel_Foremain said:

Stocky said:

Dura_Ace said:

Casino_Royale said:

Dura_Ace said:

Andy_JS said:

I'm happy with both types of places.

I've got eight cars, enough bits to make another eight, twenty bikes, enough bits to make another twenty and two motorbikes so unless I come into oligarch money it's country living for me - split between Zumerzet and Bretagne.

I would like an apartment on La Canebière in Marseille but Mrs DA does not share my deep and abiding love of la cité phocéenne.

Genuine question: how do you accommodate (still less afford) all of that?

How big is your house?

I afford it all the same way as every other rich Leninist affords anything - inheritance. Mrs DA earns a pretty penny overcharging for cosmetic dentistry too.

We've got a 4 bed stone farmhouse with two stone barns. One's a workshop and the others for storage.

The house in France is a smaller new build but its on a 20ha terrain.

I've recently has a dental implant which the NHS refused to pay for. NHS was proposing that a gap remains in my mouth. Fuck that. The implant cost me £3,500. One tooth! Amazing procedure though. The whole thing took a year.

That's a long time to sit in a dentist's chair!

Thats v expensive. There is a guy in Hove aiming who does nothing but implants and was knocking them out at a grand a time.. no idea what it us now but it will not be 3.5k ..I would be amazed if it was....

I'm not sure I'd want someone who knocks 'em out looking after my teeth!

I think you have to knock em out in order put the implant in...

IanB2

If even Betfair can't get Sunak's first name right.....

noneoftheabove

SandraMc said:

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

No flower shows are not vibrant! Sorry.

Charles

OldKingCole said:

MarqueeMark said:

Just discovered that the land in my village was, before 1066, held by Asgar the Cramped.

So just a shit name from a video game then.....

Been on a WEA Zoom course on Icelandic Myth etc. In the saga we looked at yesterday there was a footnote which included the following genealogy: Gudleif was the son of Ari, the son of Mar, the son of Atli, the son of UIf the Squint-Eyed, the son of Hogni the White, the son of Otrygg, the son of Oblaud, the son of King Hjorleif the Lecherous.

I'm surprised that the lecherous one le[if]ed many wh[j]ores

tlg86

SandraMc said:

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

Woking is more vibrating than vibrant given the building work.

SandraMc

noneoftheabove said:

SandraMc said:

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

No flower shows are not vibrant! Sorry.

Define vibrant.

OldKingCole

Andy_JS said:

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

Keep up the insults.

They're often very imaginative, though!

RochdalePioneers

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

Neither does Dr Paul Williams as MP.

noneoftheabove

SandraMc said:

noneoftheabove said:

SandraMc said:

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

No flower shows are not vibrant! Sorry.

Define vibrant.

Full of energy and excitement.

DougSeal

noneoftheabove said:

DougSeal said:

https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/1372723752241307648

That drop off in case numbers doesnt actually look much better than their October drop off?

The October dropoff was in a lockdown. The point is that the case numbers are dropping as mobility (the chart on the right) is increasing i.e. coming out of lockdown.

Andy_JS

SandraMc said:

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

Edinburgh is vibrant despite being 95% white British. Same sort of thing with Dublin. So the idea you need racial diversity is nonsense. Big African cities are no doubt vibrant despite being almost completely populated by black African people.

MrEd

noneoftheabove said:

SandraMc said:

noneoftheabove said:

SandraMc said:

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

No flower shows are not vibrant! Sorry.

Define vibrant.

Full of energy and excitement.

Waitrose describe their Essential Waitrose Blueberries as "vibrant". I certainly wouldn't call them full of energy and excitement.

IanB2

noneoftheabove said:

SandraMc said:

noneoftheabove said:

SandraMc said:

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

No flower shows are not vibrant! Sorry.

Define vibrant.

Full of energy and excitement.

Page 21 of this month's 'Dream Escape' magazine: "What better way to mark spring than visiting a vibrant flower show?"

Andy_JS

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

Because distances are so small in this country about 95% of the population can (in normal times) get on a train, bus or car and be in a large population centre within a relatively short time. I wouldn't like to live in the middle of nowhere in the United States, Canada or Australia where you might have to make a long journey to get to a large city.

algarkirk

MarqueeMark said:

Casino_Royale said:

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

I will get round to finishing the header I'm working on, but Hartlepool will likely add to Labour's woes on just how and where to fight the next election. Essentially, if you say the Tories and Labour are each going to put resources into 100 seats, the Tories can put that into 80 on defence and 20 on offence. Labour has to put it into 100 on attack - and even then, they have to leapfrog some of their low-hanging fruit and go for medium-difficult targets. And unless fortunes change dramatically for the SNP, it won't be in Scotland.

Labour has to hope that the political tide goes so far in their favour that it swamps the Tory defences.

Or accept that they will not win power in less than 2 attempts.

Labours greatest difficulty in attacking 100 seats is that their support bases are punctiliar and inconsistent with each other - socially conservative BAMEs have little in common with wokes, Guardianistas, champagne socialists, students and others who make up their patchy, clumpy support. Tory support is much more of a spectrum and continuum, from dustmen to dukes, appealing to the English (especially) tradition of contempt for theory and pseudo-intellectualism and hatred of class war. All of which will make Hartlepool huge fun. Currently I think a narrow Labour win most likely.

Dura_Ace

RochdalePioneers said:

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

Neither does Dr Paul Williams as MP.

It must be a cause for concern for Labourites that the absolute shitstain is Starmer's idea of a good candidate.

Selebian

squareroot2 said:

Charles said:

DavidL said:

rottenborough said:

DavidL said:

£354 bn borrowing this year. When the bills start to fall due expect his popularity to fall.

The bond markets may do for him long before Johnson stands down. Someone will need to take one for the team.

The bond market is completely rigged by QE and the buying of gilts by the BoE. If any other market trader behaved anything like the way that HMG does the FCA would be all over them. That said, there have been hints that people are starting to think that governments should pay a bit more for the moolah that they mooch from the markets. An increase in the cost of borrowing would be very serious for UK plc given our current imbalances and very probably fatal for the Chancellor.

I've just fixed my mortgage for 7 years at 1.49%...

V sensible

VII, even more sensible

OldKingCole

Dura_Ace said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

Neither does Dr Paul Williams as MP.

It must be a cause for concern for Labourites that the absolute shitstain is Starmer's idea of a good candidate.

He speaks very highly of you, I believe.

IanB2

Andy_JS said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

Because distances are so small in this country about 95% of the population can (in normal times) get on a train, bus or car and be in a large population centre within a relatively short time. I wouldn't like to live in the middle of nowhere in the United States, Canada or Australia where you might have to make a long journey to get to a large city.

I thought the same, travelling about both the US and Oz. They travel about a lot by air, of course, but often the airport is a long drive away.

Although we've been through months now where most of us haven't left our home patch. It's a different sort of life.

RochdalePioneers

Andy_JS said:

SandraMc said:

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

Edinburgh is vibrant despite being 95% white British. Same sort of thing with Dublin. So the idea you need racial diversity is nonsense. Big African cities are no doubt vibrant despite being almost completely populated by black African people.

That is true - racial diversity promotes different ideas. But even without it you can have a community that is 95% whatever group and is vibrant, thriving and forward looking. The problem is that for the "left behind" towns the opposite is true.

People treat their own street / community / town like a giant bin, trash it and then blame the mess on people who don't actually live there. There was a right old flap a few years ago about asylum seekers getting a "free house" on the worst bits of Teesside. That the houses were literally unlivable in due to rampant crime committed by the native residents didn't seem to sink into their thick skulls.

algarkirk

Dura_Ace said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

Neither does Dr Paul Williams as MP.

It must be a cause for concern for Labourites that the absolute shitstain is Starmer's idea of a good candidate.

Contempt for Hartlepool people is the problem not the solution.

kinabalu

MarqueeMark said:

Casino_Royale said:

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

I will get round to finishing the header I'm working on, but Hartlepool will likely add to Labour's woes on just how and where to fight the next election. Essentially, if you say the Tories and Labour are each going to put resources into 100 seats, the Tories can put that into 80 on defence and 20 on offence. Labour has to put it into 100 on attack - and even then, they have to leapfrog some of their low-hanging fruit and go for medium-difficult targets. And unless fortunes change dramatically for the SNP, it won't be in Scotland.

Labour has to hope that the political tide goes so far in their favour that it swamps the Tory defences.

Or accept that they will not win power in less than 2 attempts.

Hartlepool coming into play is absolutely fascinating but it's unlikely to damage Labour. The balance of risk is the other way. It's Brexit Central, stuffed full of white working class patriots, each and every one of them imbued with love of country and good old-fashioned commonsense, and the timing could not be better for the government. Brexit is done and looking inspired due to the EU vaccine shambles. By contrast our own vaccine efforts are paying off in spades, motoring us out of lockdown before other countries, liberties taken about to be restored. If the Tories, the party of hard leave, can't win in Hartlepool, the capital of hard leave, at this time, in these circumstances, it will be telling us the tide is turning and opposition beckons before too long. They need to win it (and convincingly) to retain control of the narrative. By this analysis, which imo is the right one, the pressure is all on them. It's something of a free hit for Labour.

Andy_JS

The Labour candidate for Hartlepool hasn't got around to deleting this tweet yet.

twitter.com/PaulWilliamsLAB/status/46719898705072129

Luckyguy1983

RochdalePioneers said:

Gadfly said:

Meanwhile, in the crazy world of Scottish politics, Salmond is apparently guilty, despite a verdict of innocence, and Sturgeon is apparently innocent despite a finding of guilt.

Yep. The biggest lie wins, and its easy to win when the picture is so murky and the players hold such a weak position.
1 The (presumably Tories) on the committee have leaked their "finding" that nippie misled Parliament, which fits neatly into her "Nippy misled parliament and Must Resign" campaign started before she gave the evidence the committee now considers to be a lie
2 "There IS a conspiracy by Salmond, his supporters and the opposition to smear us standing up for women" narrative is at least convincing prima facie as the "vast SNP and government conspiracy to get Salmond sent to jail" conspiracy.
3 Sturgeon has been disingenuous at the very least. The problem for her pursuers is that their side appear to have been even more disingenuous. "Sturgeon allegedly lied, she must resign!" say Tories where their own team have demonstrably (not allegedly) told lie after lie and not resigned. Columnists up here are pointing out the double standards being applied to Holyrood and Westminster

I've said all the way through that she will not be demolished or even significantly damaged by this and I'm more convinced of that now. It isn't that lying to parliament is acceptable. It is that standards are so low and the alternative choices even worse so that it doesn't matter the way it once would have done.

Nippy is the real victim here. Apparently...

Which columnists?

OldKingCole

algarkirk said:

MarqueeMark said:

Casino_Royale said:

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

I will get round to finishing the header I'm working on, but Hartlepool will likely add to Labour's woes on just how and where to fight the next election. Essentially, if you say the Tories and Labour are each going to put resources into 100 seats, the Tories can put that into 80 on defence and 20 on offence. Labour has to put it into 100 on attack - and even then, they have to leapfrog some of their low-hanging fruit and go for medium-difficult targets. And unless fortunes change dramatically for the SNP, it won't be in Scotland.

Labour has to hope that the political tide goes so far in their favour that it swamps the Tory defences.

Or accept that they will not win power in less than 2 attempts.

Labours greatest difficulty in attacking 100 seats is that their support bases are punctiliar and inconsistent with each other - socially conservative BAMEs have little in common with wokes, Guardianistas, champagne socialists, students and others who make up their patchy, clumpy support. Tory support is much more of a spectrum and continuum, from dustmen to dukes, appealing to the English (especially) tradition of contempt for theory and pseudo-intellectualism and hatred of class war. All of which will make Hartlepool huge fun. Currently I think a narrow Labour win most likely.

Given Hartlepool's recent electoral history I'm tempted to put money on the NIP!

MrEd

O/T, just been reading the fallout from the Rangers vs Slavia match

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56451935

One thing that struck me was Gerrard's statement, in response to Slavia's denials that one of their players had made racist remarks towards Kamara in which he said

""The disappointing thing is that their people are trying to defend their player and calling us liars,

"I feel angry. I know Glen and trust him 100%. The Slavia player has caused this and something needs to happen quickly but that is above me. But whatever happens, I stand next to Glen."

Call me naive but surely Gerrard is acting in the same way as the Slavia team. The Slavia manager is trying to defend his player as Gerrard is defending his; Gerrard is calling Slavia liars for defending their player while criticising Slavia for defending their player and calling Rangers liars. He also seems to think that he knows the truth, yet that's impossible unless he was standing in earshot of the exchange, which he wasn't.

So what Gerrard is really saying "I know better than you and, even though, we are both making accusations, mine have more validity" Rather an elitist point of view.

RochdalePioneers

Dura_Ace said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

Neither does Dr Paul Williams as MP.

It must be a cause for concern for Labourites that the absolute shitstain is Starmer's idea of a good candidate.

Wowsers. On what planet is he an "absolute shitstain"? He's done medical mission work in Uganda. He's a well-respected popular GP. He led a co-op of GP practices to bring local services back in-house to improve provision. As an MP he actually went to all parts of the constituency unlike James "Where's" Wharton his immediate predecessor. His campaign work on autism diagnosis was important.

He has been badly advised, both in running for PCC and now being bounced into the Hartlepool candidacy, but "absolute shitstain" says more about you than it does him.

noneoftheabove

Andy_JS said:

The Labour candidate for Hartlepool hasn't got around to deleting this tweet yet.

twitter.com/PaulWilliamsLAB/status/46719898705072129

What is the obsession with this tweet on here about? Its hardly scandal of the century?

Nigelb

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

How many of the Tory selectorate match that description, though ?

another_richard

SandraMc said:

Balrog said:

NickPalmer said:

Interesting exchange between Foxy and Casino on the last thread - Foxy prefers vibrant towns which aren't monocultural, Casino says small towns are indeed multicultural - all ages and classes.

My part of Surrey is overwhelmingly what I would call monocultural - nearly everyone is white, English and shares broadly similar values. Casino would correctly say that there's a fair mix of ages and (tbh somewhat less) classes, but it does feel extremely homogenous. Whether that's a good thing is where preferences divide.

I'd like to encounter people routinely who see life quite differently - not necessarily like me, just different - Italians, Sikhs, whatever. Many people find that unsettling, though probably most wouldn't mind a bit of it - the first Indian restaurant in a small town is surely seen by most residents as a welcome option, an arrival of 20 Indian restaurants not so much. The key for me is genuine diversity - I wouldn't want to live in a 95% Italian or Sikh district either (and the tendency of different ethnic groups to live together is natural but a pity IMO), but it's great if there's something different around every corner.

But if you go to Woking or Aldershot there is a lot more diversity and its only 10 miles away. Godalming is a little bit lost in time, but a nice place.

A question: why is it that places that are multicultural are always described as vibrant? I live in an area which is predominantly white (but not exclusively) and with a higher than average number of retirees. Pre-lockdown it seemed that every week there was a fete, fair, flower show, concert, charity fun run or bike ride, etc. Sometimes I felt exhausted just reading the local noticeboard. Isn't this vibrant?

Because 'vibrant' makes it sound desirable rather than the reality being that you're renting a room in Lewisham or Walthamstow.

MattW

MarqueeMark said:

Casino_Royale said:

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

I will get round to finishing the header I'm working on, but Hartlepool will likely add to Labour's woes on just how and where to fight the next election. Essentially, if you say the Tories and Labour are each going to put resources into 100 seats, the Tories can put that into 80 on defence and 20 on offence. Labour has to put it into 100 on attack - and even then, they have to leapfrog some of their low-hanging fruit and go for medium-difficult targets. And unless fortunes change dramatically for the SNP, it won't be in Scotland.

Labour has to hope that the political tide goes so far in their favour that it swamps the Tory defences.

Or accept that they will not win power in less than 2 attempts.

*FEWER*

The Tories are going to seed...

HYUFD

Provided the government is polling well then Boris will likely be re elected as PM in 2024.

If the government is polling less well then Rishi Sunak may well be his replacement, in which case he would be the next PM whether or not Starmer won in 2024 which is all this betting shows

MrEd

RochdalePioneers said:

Dura_Ace said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

Neither does Dr Paul Williams as MP.

It must be a cause for concern for Labourites that the absolute shitstain is Starmer's idea of a good candidate.

Wowsers. On what planet is he an "absolute shitstain"? He's done medical mission work in Uganda. He's a well-respected popular GP. He led a co-op of GP practices to bring local services back in-house to improve provision. As an MP he actually went to all parts of the constituency unlike James "Where's" Wharton his immediate predecessor. His campaign work on autism diagnosis was important.

He has been badly advised, both in running for PCC and now being bounced into the Hartlepool candidacy, but "absolute shitstain" says more about you than it does him.

Putting a candidate who said let's have another referendum into a seat that is one of the most pro-Brexit is a mistake. At the moment, views on Brexit (still) play one of the major influencing factors on voting. Implicitly, it also feeds into the view that Labour think their target voters are stupid.

Of more concern for Labour is what this says about Labour's decision making skills and thought processes.

IanB2

MattW said:

MarqueeMark said:

Casino_Royale said:

rottenborough said:

A devastating report from Compass exposes the near-impossibility of Labour winning alone at the next election. We divide, they conquer, by Grace Barnett and Neal Lawson, shows Labour now needs at least a 10.52% swing, greater than in 1945 and 1997.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/18/labour-electoral-system-priti-patel-mayoral-elections

I see that report is repeating tired old canards about progressive alliances and changing the voting system.

When is Labour going to actually engage with the electorate as it is to, you know, win votes?

I will get round to finishing the header I'm working on, but Hartlepool will likely add to Labour's woes on just how and where to fight the next election. Essentially, if you say the Tories and Labour are each going to put resources into 100 seats, the Tories can put that into 80 on defence and 20 on offence. Labour has to put it into 100 on attack - and even then, they have to leapfrog some of their low-hanging fruit and go for medium-difficult targets. And unless fortunes change dramatically for the SNP, it won't be in Scotland.

Labour has to hope that the political tide goes so far in their favour that it swamps the Tory defences.

Or accept that they will not win power in less than 2 attempts.

*FEWER*

The Tories are going to seed...

Or just say "in a single go", that being the only circumstance described by that phrase other than not trying at all?

HYUFD

Dura_Ace said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

On topic, Liz Truss, that is all.

You have to remember that every tory policy is now calibrated toward the uneducated and ignorant whims of a notional 54 year old fat white man from Hartlepool who has the suit symbols of playing cards tattooed on his nicotine stained knuckles. Diamond Liz as leader doesn't tick that box.

Indeed, Liz Truss has done a good job with the post Brexit trade deals but she is basically still an Orange Book LD not a conservative, if she was Conservative leader she would lose some voters to Labour because she is too rightwing economically and some voters to UKIP and Reform UK and Fox as she is too socially liberal