Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Test – politicalbetting.com

124678

Comments

  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The market at work:

    Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

    The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

    The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

    Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.
    Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

    If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.
    Hi Philip, completely off topic but I have a quick question.

    I’m looking at buying a new vacuum cleaner. I think you once said you had a Shark? If that’s so, what are they like?
    Wow you have a good memory.

    I'm very impressed by the Shark. Much better than the Dyson that it replaced. Would highly recommend, but please don't hold it against me if you don't like it.
    Oh, I won’t, don’t worry. I just wondered if it was any good. If it is, I’ll give one a go as they’re on offer at Amazon at the moment.

    Dust is the problem in my house, because I’m very bad at dusting. It keeps clogging up the vacuums I buy.
    Its hard to compare like for like as our Dyson was cordless while this is corded, but this is much, much better for us.

    Dust and pet hair was an issue for us. The Shark gets it up well and the filter is very easy to clear and clean. If you don't clear the filter then its perfomance will drop, but so long as you do its really good for us at least.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 21,866
    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    if they wanted Indiref2 they'd have brought forward a referendum by now. Their best chance has already passed (during TMs time as PM). they could have agreed to her deal and had it as a condition.

    Also, as others on here have said, they've done nothing to convince more people that SInd is the best thing for Scotland. They've just done the grievance thing.
    They couldn't have possibly agreed to an Indyref as a condition for agreeing May's Deal.

    That is absolute insaninty. Just think of the implications for both May and Sturgeon.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 1,664
    For all those betting on the F1 today..

    Looks like Vettel could be disqualified as a litre of fuel wasn’t able to be taken at the end of the race
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 35,353

    Bugger.

    Lewis Hamilton believes he may still have not fully recovered from contracting Covid-19 after he experienced fatigue and dizziness at the Hungarian Grand Prix. The British driver finished third in a monumental effort to come back from last place at the Hungaroring but admitted he fears he may be suffering from long Covid.

    After his immense recovery drive Hamilton missed the start of the post-race press conferences as he was being attended to by his Mercedes team doctor for fatigue. Afterwards he admitted that he did not feel he had fully recovered from the effects of the virus he contracted in December last year.

    “I have been fighting all year with my health after what happened at the end of last year and it is still a battle,” he said. “I had really big dizziness and everything got a bit blurry on the podium.”

    The race at the Hungaroring is hot and physically demanding but Hamilton conceded that he may be experiencing the symptoms of the form of the virus where health problems remain for months after it is first contracted.

    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Fortunately he now has a decent break before the next GP.
  • The market at work:

    Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

    The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

    The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

    Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.
    Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

    If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.
    There isn't an infinite pool of British workers to pick from. A lorry driver earns more than double what I earn per hour but I'm not about to quit my job to drive lorries.
    You're misleading in referring to what you earn as you have already factored in the expectation of higher future earnings when you took on that job. A lorry driver over their lifetime doesn't earn double what you should earn per hour or anything like it.

    Supply and demand isn't that complicated, as wages go up more people will be attracted to the job - and ultimately some marginal business will decide its not worth paying for afterall so there will be less demand too. Thus closing the gap.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,801
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The market at work:

    Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

    The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

    The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

    Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.
    Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

    If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.
    Hi Philip, completely off topic but I have a quick question.

    I’m looking at buying a new vacuum cleaner. I think you once said you had a Shark? If that’s so, what are they like?
    Wow you have a good memory.

    I'm very impressed by the Shark. Much better than the Dyson that it replaced. Would highly recommend, but please don't hold it against me if you don't like it.
    Oh, I won’t, don’t worry. I just wondered if it was any good. If it is, I’ll give one a go as they’re on offer at Amazon at the moment.

    Dust is the problem in my house, because I’m very bad at dusting. It keeps clogging up the vacuums I buy.
    Have you ever tried the Quintin Crisp strategy? "There is no need to do any housework. After the first four years, the dust doesn't get any worse."
  • Andy_CookeAndy_Cooke Posts: 3,888
    edited August 2021
    Nigelb said:

    COVID-19 hospitalizations in Florida have reached the highest level since July 2020. At the current rate it will reach the all-time high within 4 days
    https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1421835886581501957

    I don’t understand.
    I thought DeSantis had proved (PROVED!) that blocking restrictions and mask mandates showed that nothing bad would happen*.
    I mean, it can’t even be explained away as any low vaccine takeup, because we were assured earlier that Florida is a high vax take-up state.

    It’s perplexing. I think we should all agree to ignore these uncomfortable facts.

    *NB, Mayors are now pleading with people to wear masks and distance (while DeSantis is threatening them, because there’s obviously no need(?) and DisneyWorld has reinstituted a mask mandate
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151
    Alistair said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    if they wanted Indiref2 they'd have brought forward a referendum by now. Their best chance has already passed (during TMs time as PM). they could have agreed to her deal and had it as a condition.

    Also, as others on here have said, they've done nothing to convince more people that SInd is the best thing for Scotland. They've just done the grievance thing.
    They couldn't have possibly agreed to an Indyref as a condition for agreeing May's Deal.

    That is absolute insaninty. Just think of the implications for both May and Sturgeon.
    Yes, that’s a bonkers idea

    However the salient point remains. If Westminster simply says No, what can Holyrood do, practically?

    There is no evidence that Scotland is seething with resentment at being denied a vote. A plurality of Scots don’t want one for years, many don’t want one ever

    I think some of the Nits on here fondly hoped that Boris would roll over and yield to the ‘moral force’ of another SNP victory. He hasn’t and he won’t, and nor will any other Tory PM - unless, of course, the polls show that No is extremely likely to win

    Impasse beckons. It could easily last a decade, or more
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,807
    isam said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    Yes, but you said ‘what is sauce for the goose…’ in reply to a post criticising someone who did say just that.

    I agree with your last paragraph, yes. It doesn’t really matter, he’s not meant to be a paragon of virtue
    OK, so I was correct. We are all allowed to laugh at the evil and hapless Starmer/ Brittas, but we should all be blowing smoke up Johnson's a***. I could name more than a dozen on here who do just that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 35,353

    ydoethur said:

    The market at work:

    Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

    The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

    The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

    Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.
    Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

    If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.
    Hi Philip, completely off topic but I have a quick question.

    I’m looking at buying a new vacuum cleaner. I think you once said you had a Shark? If that’s so, what are they like?
    Wow you have a good memory.

    I'm very impressed by the Shark. Much better than the Dyson that it replaced. Would highly recommend, but please don't hold it against me if you don't like it.
    So in this case the shark has jumped the Dyson ?
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,687
    edited August 2021

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    But they lost the vote only in 2014. It's Brexit that put Sindy back on the agenda and as soon as that was settled along comes a black swan public health emergency. Against this backdrop I don't see what more Sturgeon and the SNP could be expected to do to advance things over and above what they've done. They stuck Sindy2 front and centre of their platform for the Holyrood elections, won, and say they will agitate for it once the pandemic is over. What's so wimpy about that? Makes perfect sense to me. It could possibly be they don't really in their heart of hearts want to fight a Sindy Referendum, either because they're scared of losing it (killing the dream), or scared of winning it (oh god now what?), but I don't see the evidence for that.
    You may well be right. It may well be the case. But all they've done from your post is just the cheap talk bit. They're not actually DOING anything to progress the case. I'm not saying the SG/SNP should have been dedicating itself to independence campaigning over the pandemic period, but over the course of the last full parliament they didn't do anything of any sort of concrete use. All they have done is a bit of cheap talk in the election run up, including campaign slogans that conveniently forgot some of the stuff they were supposedly asking people to vote for them for in 2016.

    Perhaps they did need to wait out the Brexit crystallisation, and no-one could have foreseen what a drawn out crock of shit that process was. But all that dithering over that period achieved for them is a lot of empty rhetoric and missing the best window of opportunity they had to actually justify pushing for the vote. ​And now, blaming covid isn't really an excuse when they managed to have a Holyrood election through it, and it would not have stopped some of the policy work that could have been done to help prepare the case for independence when any referendum actually came about. No, they just chose not to do anything about it.

    ​For what it's worth I hope you're right and I'm wrong. Any argument for delaying because of covid is not one that will have much credence for a great deal longer, when the last few restrictions are dropped in a week's time other than some masks and continued recommendation for home working. So I assume we will be in a position to see fairly soon if I am barking completely up the wrong tree.

    But too many things have gone wrong internally within the SNP for me to believe otherwise. It got suspicious when they shut down all internal party conference talk about "Plan B" routes for achieving independence without a Section 30 order and nothing they've done since then (including doing everything they could to undermine the Martin Keatings case) has reversed the impression that they have become determined to find reasons to stall on doing anything, that they have become increasingly autocratic and paranoid about their position. They only throw out crumbs to the indy faithful when it becomes clear that the Yes movement are having a bit of a wobble about persisting with the SNP and you only have to look at the National front pages to see the number of times that that has happened, generally with some pretence about some date that never manifests itself, until the next promised date. At the very least all they have done is cried wolf one too many times.

    But I guess we'll see soon enough if they really are serious or not.
    Yes it should become clear what's what over the next couple of years.

    Are you Scottish and a Sindy supporter then?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 21,307
    Nigelb said:

    Bugger.

    Lewis Hamilton believes he may still have not fully recovered from contracting Covid-19 after he experienced fatigue and dizziness at the Hungarian Grand Prix. The British driver finished third in a monumental effort to come back from last place at the Hungaroring but admitted he fears he may be suffering from long Covid.

    After his immense recovery drive Hamilton missed the start of the post-race press conferences as he was being attended to by his Mercedes team doctor for fatigue. Afterwards he admitted that he did not feel he had fully recovered from the effects of the virus he contracted in December last year.

    “I have been fighting all year with my health after what happened at the end of last year and it is still a battle,” he said. “I had really big dizziness and everything got a bit blurry on the podium.”

    The race at the Hungaroring is hot and physically demanding but Hamilton conceded that he may be experiencing the symptoms of the form of the virus where health problems remain for months after it is first contracted.

    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.


    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Fortunately he now has a decent break before the next GP.
    If ever there was a track to induce dizziness it’s the Hungaroring.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638

    darkage said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    I find the same on twitter, people that I follow for other reasons (mainly football), constantly attacking Johnson for everything that happens regardless of the merits of their arguments. The worst I've unfollowed, some of them I ignore, the rest I correct. Don't get me wrong I'm not a supporter of Johnson but some of the problems are not of his making.
    I think it is just funny that he makes people so mad. Why get upset about it?
    Or why get upset about people who are made mad by him. Bit snowflakey imo.
    Who’s upset? It’s funny.

    I used to suffer from BDS myself, around 2008 - I couldn’t believe Londoners would prefer a man who said ‘piffle’ & ‘balderdash’ over Red Ken. But they did, then they did again.

    The reason now is Brexit. Had he been a big part of the Remain campaign, and acknowledged as the one who got them over the line, I think Cameroons and Blairites would be happy enough with him as PM
  • darkagedarkage Posts: 1,347
    spudgfsh said:

    darkage said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    I find the same on twitter, people that I follow for other reasons (mainly football), constantly attacking Johnson for everything that happens regardless of the merits of their arguments. The worst I've unfollowed, some of them I ignore, the rest I correct. Don't get me wrong I'm not a supporter of Johnson but some of the problems are not of his making.
    I think it is just funny that he makes people so mad. Why get upset about it?
    The main thing is that there are a lot of people on the left who are outraged that he's more electable that JC was and cannot understand why, if they shout it loud enough or long enough, people don't have an epiphany and start voting Labour.
    Agreed. Resorting to insults is not generally going to help your cause.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 45,006
    @Philip_Thompson and @turbotubbs

    Thanks for your advice, most helpful.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    Alistair said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    if they wanted Indiref2 they'd have brought forward a referendum by now. Their best chance has already passed (during TMs time as PM). they could have agreed to her deal and had it as a condition.

    Also, as others on here have said, they've done nothing to convince more people that SInd is the best thing for Scotland. They've just done the grievance thing.
    They couldn't have possibly agreed to an Indyref as a condition for agreeing May's Deal.

    That is absolute insaninty. Just think of the implications for both May and Sturgeon.
    it would have provided to both leaders what they wanted. Sturgeon could have used IndiRef2 as a mechanism for staying in the EU. The NI experience would now have had an impact in that decision but it'd not be entirely comparible
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    Yes, but you said ‘what is sauce for the goose…’ in reply to a post criticising someone who did say just that.

    I agree with your last paragraph, yes. It doesn’t really matter, he’s not meant to be a paragon of virtue
    OK, so I was correct. We are all allowed to laugh at the evil and hapless Starmer/ Brittas, but we should all be blowing smoke up Johnson's a***. I could name more than a dozen on here who do just that.
    No you were wrong - the comment people reacted to was one saying words to the effect of “How can Carrie sleep with that disgusting blob of fat?” - no one on here says derogatory things like that about Sir Keir’s relationship with his wife, so it’s not a case of “ What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?”
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 31,056
    isam said:

    darkage said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    I find the same on twitter, people that I follow for other reasons (mainly football), constantly attacking Johnson for everything that happens regardless of the merits of their arguments. The worst I've unfollowed, some of them I ignore, the rest I correct. Don't get me wrong I'm not a supporter of Johnson but some of the problems are not of his making.
    I think it is just funny that he makes people so mad. Why get upset about it?
    Or why get upset about people who are made mad by him. Bit snowflakey imo.
    Who’s upset? It’s funny.

    I used to suffer from BDS myself, around 2008 - I couldn’t believe Londoners would prefer a man who said ‘piffle’ & ‘balderdash’ over Red Ken. But they did, then they did again.

    The reason now is Brexit. Had he been a big part of the Remain campaign, and acknowledged as the one who got them over the line, I think Cameroons and Blairites would be happy enough with him as PM
    The poster who isn't coming back until people stop being nasty about Boris seemed upset.
    I agree that it's funny.
  • isamisam Posts: 38,638

    isam said:

    darkage said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    I find the same on twitter, people that I follow for other reasons (mainly football), constantly attacking Johnson for everything that happens regardless of the merits of their arguments. The worst I've unfollowed, some of them I ignore, the rest I correct. Don't get me wrong I'm not a supporter of Johnson but some of the problems are not of his making.
    I think it is just funny that he makes people so mad. Why get upset about it?
    Or why get upset about people who are made mad by him. Bit snowflakey imo.
    Who’s upset? It’s funny.

    I used to suffer from BDS myself, around 2008 - I couldn’t believe Londoners would prefer a man who said ‘piffle’ & ‘balderdash’ over Red Ken. But they did, then they did again.

    The reason now is Brexit. Had he been a big part of the Remain campaign, and acknowledged as the one who got them over the line, I think Cameroons and Blairites would be happy enough with him as PM
    The poster who isn't coming back until people stop being nasty about Boris seemed upset.
    I agree that it's funny.
    Ah yes, I see.
  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The market at work:

    Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

    The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

    The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

    Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.
    Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

    If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.
    Hi Philip, completely off topic but I have a quick question.

    I’m looking at buying a new vacuum cleaner. I think you once said you had a Shark? If that’s so, what are they like?
    Wow you have a good memory.

    I'm very impressed by the Shark. Much better than the Dyson that it replaced. Would highly recommend, but please don't hold it against me if you don't like it.
    Oh, I won’t, don’t worry. I just wondered if it was any good. If it is, I’ll give one a go as they’re on offer at Amazon at the moment.

    Dust is the problem in my house, because I’m very bad at dusting. It keeps clogging up the vacuums I buy.
    You can get domestic air purifiers that are supposed to suck dust (and pollen etc) out of the air. Tbh I am still at the "vaguely thinking about it" stage (they aren't cheap) but mention it in case you've not seen them.

    Not getting clogged up by dust was the whole point of Dysons and similar, wasn't it? No filters and bags to get clogged. Good luck.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079

    darkage said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    I find the same on twitter, people that I follow for other reasons (mainly football), constantly attacking Johnson for everything that happens regardless of the merits of their arguments. The worst I've unfollowed, some of them I ignore, the rest I correct. Don't get me wrong I'm not a supporter of Johnson but some of the problems are not of his making.
    I think it is just funny that he makes people so mad. Why get upset about it?
    Or why get upset about people who are made mad by him. Bit snowflakey imo.
    I don't get upset about it I just find it tiring. It's not possible to have an informed discussion with someone who will never consider any opinion on a particular matter than theirs (let alone consider an alternative opinion as valid or correct).
  • TazTaz Posts: 3,115

    The market at work:

    Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

    The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

    The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

    Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.
    Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

    If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.
    There isn't an infinite pool of British workers to pick from. A lorry driver earns more than double what I earn per hour but I'm not about to quit my job to drive lorries.
    There isn’t an infinite pool of anything. Rising wages will attract more people to the profession irrespective of,your personal circumstances
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    darkage said:

    spudgfsh said:

    darkage said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    I find the same on twitter, people that I follow for other reasons (mainly football), constantly attacking Johnson for everything that happens regardless of the merits of their arguments. The worst I've unfollowed, some of them I ignore, the rest I correct. Don't get me wrong I'm not a supporter of Johnson but some of the problems are not of his making.
    I think it is just funny that he makes people so mad. Why get upset about it?
    The main thing is that there are a lot of people on the left who are outraged that he's more electable that JC was and cannot understand why, if they shout it loud enough or long enough, people don't have an epiphany and start voting Labour.
    Agreed. Resorting to insults is not generally going to help your cause.
    They don't even try to convince people that they are correct, the fact that they have the opinion should be enough for you to believe it.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 31,056
    Alistair said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    if they wanted Indiref2 they'd have brought forward a referendum by now. Their best chance has already passed (during TMs time as PM). they could have agreed to her deal and had it as a condition.

    Also, as others on here have said, they've done nothing to convince more people that SInd is the best thing for Scotland. They've just done the grievance thing.
    They couldn't have possibly agreed to an Indyref as a condition for agreeing May's Deal.

    That is absolute insaninty. Just think of the implications for both May and Sturgeon.
    Wasn't that a Wings bright idea at one point?
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 2,165
    kinabalu said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    But they lost the vote only in 2014. It's Brexit that put Sindy back on the agenda and as soon as that was settled along comes a black swan public health emergency. Against this backdrop I don't see what more Sturgeon and the SNP could be expected to do to advance things over and above what they've done. They stuck Sindy2 front and centre of their platform for the Holyrood elections, won, and say they will agitate for it once the pandemic is over. What's so wimpy about that? Makes perfect sense to me. It could possibly be they don't really in their heart of hearts want to fight a Sindy Referendum, either because they're scared of losing it (killing the dream), or scared of winning it (oh god now what?), but I don't see the evidence for that.
    You may well be right. It may well be the case. But all they've done from your post is just the cheap talk bit. They're not actually DOING anything to progress the case. I'm not saying the SG/SNP should have been dedicating itself to independence campaigning over the pandemic period, but over the course of the last full parliament they didn't do anything of any sort of concrete use. All they have done is a bit of cheap talk in the election run up, including campaign slogans that conveniently forgot some of the stuff they were supposedly asking people to vote for them for in 2016.

    Perhaps they did need to wait out the Brexit crystallisation, and no-one could have foreseen what a drawn out crock of shit that process was. But all that dithering over that period achieved for them is a lot of empty rhetoric and missing the best window of opportunity they had to actually justify pushing for the vote. ​And now, blaming covid isn't really an excuse when they managed to have a Holyrood election through it, and it would not have stopped some of the policy work that could have been done to help prepare the case for independence when any referendum actually came about. No, they just chose not to do anything about it.

    ​For what it's worth I hope you're right and I'm wrong. Any argument for delaying because of covid is not one that will have much credence for a great deal longer, when the last few restrictions are dropped in a week's time other than some masks and continued recommendation for home working. So I assume we will be in a position to see fairly soon if I am barking completely up the wrong tree.

    But too many things have gone wrong internally within the SNP for me to believe otherwise. It got suspicious when they shut down all internal party conference talk about "Plan B" routes for achieving independence without a Section 30 order and nothing they've done since then (including doing everything they could to undermine the Martin Keatings case) has reversed the impression that they have become determined to find reasons to stall on doing anything, that they have become increasingly autocratic and paranoid about their position. They only throw out crumbs to the indy faithful when it becomes clear that the Yes movement are having a bit of a wobble about persisting with the SNP and you only have to look at the National front pages to see the number of times that that has happened, generally with some pretence about some date that never manifests itself, until the next promised date. At the very least all they have done is cried wolf one too many times.

    But I guess we'll see soon enough if they really are serious or not.
    Yes it should become clear what's what over the next couple of years.

    Are you Scottish and a Sindy supporter then?
    Yes and yes.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    Taz said:

    The market at work:

    Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

    The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

    The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

    Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.
    Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

    If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.
    There isn't an infinite pool of British workers to pick from. A lorry driver earns more than double what I earn per hour but I'm not about to quit my job to drive lorries.
    There isn’t an infinite pool of anything. Rising wages will attract more people to the profession irrespective of,your personal circumstances
    but most companies are not prepared to get someone in who does not have a valid licence for lorries. It's why there's a shortage of bin lorry drivers at the moment. they're being offered more to drive elsewhere
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 28,919
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    A party determined on Indy would, by now, have concrete, definite, firm and costed proposals on many of the issues of Indy. Eg the currency. They’ve had decades to think.

    Yet they don’t. They are still chucking out mad fag-packet ideas like that one last week from ‘a cartographer’.
    *Oh just convert all sterling mortgages to the new McShekel*

    They are emotionally committed to Indy. That is not in doubt. Yet they refuse to engage with it, practically and intellectually. Because down that road there are monsters they do not wish to confront, let alone reveal to the voters
    Yes, they have the same tactics as the Brexiteers. In order to win they have to be very vague as to what an indyScotland looks like in order to have as broad as possible coalition. They need to keep every one onboard, from those wanting to be in the Sterling zone, to those wanting to be in the Eurozone, to those wanting a Scottish currency.

    It is cakeism on steroids, but I think like Irish reunification, it is only a matter of time. There is simply too much divergence from English politics in both NI and Scotland.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,687
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    A party determined on Indy would, by now, have concrete, definite, firm and costed proposals on many of the issues of Indy. Eg the currency. They’ve had decades to think.

    Yet they don’t. They are still chucking out mad fag-packet ideas like that one last week from ‘a cartographer’.
    *Oh just convert all sterling mortgages to the new McShekel*

    They are emotionally committed to Indy. That is not in doubt. Yet they refuse to engage with it, practically and intellectually. Because down that road there are monsters they do not wish to confront, let alone reveal to the voters
    No that just gives something to shoot at. You don't do it like that. You stay vague and ethereal and ra ra. Leave showed the way.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    A party determined on Indy would, by now, have concrete, definite, firm and costed proposals on many of the issues of Indy. Eg the currency. They’ve had decades to think.

    Yet they don’t. They are still chucking out mad fag-packet ideas like that one last week from ‘a cartographer’.
    *Oh just convert all sterling mortgages to the new McShekel*

    They are emotionally committed to Indy. That is not in doubt. Yet they refuse to engage with it, practically and intellectually. Because down that road there are monsters they do not wish to confront, let alone reveal to the voters
    Yes, they have the same tactics as the Brexiteers. In order to win they have to be very vague as to what an indyScotland looks like in order to have as broad as possible coalition. They need to keep every one onboard, from those wanting to be in the Sterling zone, to those wanting to be in the Eurozone, to those wanting a Scottish currency.

    It is cakeism on steroids, but I think like Irish reunification, it is only a matter of time. There is simply too much divergence from English politics in both NI and Scotland.
    the Cakeism isn't attracting enough new converts to the cause. Even Johnson hasn't done that
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 26,687
    Stocky said:

    kinabalu said:

    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I wasn't watching, but the way this is reported makes it sound lovely, but was it out of sportsmanship? I mean, had they gone to a jump-off presumably one of them would have missed out on the gold, so avoiding that took away the risk for either. So even if they were being entirely noble, they happened to benefit.

    An incredible Olympic high jump final ended with both Qatar's Mutaz Essa Barshim and Italy's Gianmarco Tamberi taking gold medals...

    The athletes were offered an opportunity to take part in a jump-off.

    But in a moment of sportsmanship, they agreed to share the title, sparking huge celebrations
    .

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/58048827

    They'd been at it for two hours and could not be split. My guess is they were both knackered in the Tokyo heat so any result would not have reflected their merit.

    Take an example everyone (of a certain age) remembers, the Dennis Taylor/Steve Davis snooker final. Classic. 18 million viewers staying up past midnight. But when you watch the ending on Youtube, both players are out on their feet, missing gimmes and even having trouble walking.

    Split the gold? I'd rather they came back tomorrow but that wasn't an option so why not?
    I agree why not - but it still doesn't seem like it was out of sportsmanship when it conveniently means neither risks losing out for being .1% less fit or some such. Same logic would suggest you call a world cup win after 90 minutes since they are tired at the end so it wouldn't reflect true merit.

    I don't think that cynical thought will have been in their minds, but the fact is both benefit from the move, so I think it is valid to note that their sportsmanlike conduct is convenient for them, whether they intended it or not.
    I was surprised it was offered but not surprised the offer was accepted. They both get gold. It's a total win win. That's rare in life. It's usually just a soundbite not a literal truth.
    I wonder if in the morning one will regret it when they look at the Wikipedia entry?
    Maybe but I wouldn't. They're not sharing the gold. It's one each.
    Yes and no. It's basically half each. Bad decision I think.
    That's because you're a liberal individualist and I'm a communitarian. Communitarians like shared golds.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    A party determined on Indy would, by now, have concrete, definite, firm and costed proposals on many of the issues of Indy. Eg the currency. They’ve had decades to think.

    Yet they don’t. They are still chucking out mad fag-packet ideas like that one last week from ‘a cartographer’.
    *Oh just convert all sterling mortgages to the new McShekel*

    They are emotionally committed to Indy. That is not in doubt. Yet they refuse to engage with it, practically and intellectually. Because down that road there are monsters they do not wish to confront, let alone reveal to the voters
    Yes, they have the same tactics as the Brexiteers. In order to win they have to be very vague as to what an indyScotland looks like in order to have as broad as possible coalition. They need to keep every one onboard, from those wanting to be in the Sterling zone, to those wanting to be in the Eurozone, to those wanting a Scottish currency.

    It is cakeism on steroids, but I think like Irish reunification, it is only a matter of time. There is simply too much divergence from English politics in both NI and Scotland.
    Yes, there is a clear parallel with the wafflier Brexiteers.

    Thing is, we’ve all now seen what vague, airy promises actually mean in reality, and it is not pretty. I’m a Leaver (and I still believe it was the right decision) yet I have to admit this. Brexit has been immensely painful and divisive, it has embittered a third of the country, and the benefits are slow to reveal themselves to many

    The SNP now has to explain why Sindy will be easier and better than Brexit. Tricky.

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 17,930



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
  • isam said:

    isam said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    Yes, but you said ‘what is sauce for the goose…’ in reply to a post criticising someone who did say just that.

    I agree with your last paragraph, yes. It doesn’t really matter, he’s not meant to be a paragon of virtue
    OK, so I was correct. We are all allowed to laugh at the evil and hapless Starmer/ Brittas, but we should all be blowing smoke up Johnson's a***. I could name more than a dozen on here who do just that.
    No you were wrong - the comment people reacted to was one saying words to the effect of “How can Carrie sleep with that disgusting blob of fat?” - no one on here says derogatory things like that about Sir Keir’s relationship with his wife, so it’s not a case of “ What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?”
    Maybe because Sir Keir ISN'T a disgusting blob of fat?
  • YoungTurkYoungTurk Posts: 158
    edited August 2021
    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    A party determined on Indy would, by now, have concrete, definite, firm and costed proposals on many of the issues of Indy. Eg the currency. They’ve had decades to think.

    Yet they don’t. They are still chucking out mad fag-packet ideas like that one last week from ‘a cartographer’.
    *Oh just convert all sterling mortgages to the new McShekel*

    They are emotionally committed to Indy. That is not in doubt. Yet they refuse to engage with it, practically and intellectually. Because down that road there are monsters they do not wish to confront, let alone reveal to the voters
    Yes. Separatism has lost 12 Scotland-wide votes so far this century, and yet still the separatists don't come up with a reasonable plan for independence. Part of the reason is they can't admit in public that by far the most important country for an iScotland to have friendly relations with would be rUK. Form a CU, SM, and free travel area with rUK and an iScotland could actually work. But they can't say that, because everybody would laugh. Obviously in such an arrangement they wouldn't get a veto over monetary policy. Nor could they expect rUK to wipe their bottoms for them if times got hard. And they're already in a union. If a second indyref were ever held, and if BOTH sides were to come up with reasonable plans - for independence, and for improving the union - the plans would probably look quite similar. Another way of making the same point? How about politicians stop taking the piss and wasting everybody's time? Oh, wait. They've also got the problem that whereas "England" exists as a hate target, it has practically no existence as a political entity, and I don't think they can really imagine what things would be like if it did.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
  • alex_alex_ Posts: 7,150



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    To be fair this isn't the complete story. As i understand it F1 competitors aren't banned from making political statements. In fact, some of the drivers were actually wearing FIA issued T-shirts supporting LGBTQ!

    However in the aftermath of BLM statements last year they came to a compromise agreement to exclude the pre-race anthems and podium presentations from making such statements.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 7,673
    kinabalu said:

    Stocky said:

    kinabalu said:

    tlg86 said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    I wasn't watching, but the way this is reported makes it sound lovely, but was it out of sportsmanship? I mean, had they gone to a jump-off presumably one of them would have missed out on the gold, so avoiding that took away the risk for either. So even if they were being entirely noble, they happened to benefit.

    An incredible Olympic high jump final ended with both Qatar's Mutaz Essa Barshim and Italy's Gianmarco Tamberi taking gold medals...

    The athletes were offered an opportunity to take part in a jump-off.

    But in a moment of sportsmanship, they agreed to share the title, sparking huge celebrations
    .

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/58048827

    They'd been at it for two hours and could not be split. My guess is they were both knackered in the Tokyo heat so any result would not have reflected their merit.

    Take an example everyone (of a certain age) remembers, the Dennis Taylor/Steve Davis snooker final. Classic. 18 million viewers staying up past midnight. But when you watch the ending on Youtube, both players are out on their feet, missing gimmes and even having trouble walking.

    Split the gold? I'd rather they came back tomorrow but that wasn't an option so why not?
    I agree why not - but it still doesn't seem like it was out of sportsmanship when it conveniently means neither risks losing out for being .1% less fit or some such. Same logic would suggest you call a world cup win after 90 minutes since they are tired at the end so it wouldn't reflect true merit.

    I don't think that cynical thought will have been in their minds, but the fact is both benefit from the move, so I think it is valid to note that their sportsmanlike conduct is convenient for them, whether they intended it or not.
    I was surprised it was offered but not surprised the offer was accepted. They both get gold. It's a total win win. That's rare in life. It's usually just a soundbite not a literal truth.
    I wonder if in the morning one will regret it when they look at the Wikipedia entry?
    Maybe but I wouldn't. They're not sharing the gold. It's one each.
    Yes and no. It's basically half each. Bad decision I think.
    That's because you're a liberal individualist and I'm a communitarian. Communitarians like shared golds.
    The decision devalues the gold. If either athlete truly thinks they have gold they are deluded. But, of course, they don't really think that - not really. So it is ultimately unfair on the athletes.

    It is also unfair verses other events. The long jump, for example, will have a gold, silver and bronze. The high jump gold, gold and bronze.

    Perhaps they should have awarded two silver pluses?

    The above train of thought is rooted in liberalism, I guess, but it is mainly rooted in logic.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,654

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    You might not have others have.
  • Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    A party determined on Indy would, by now, have concrete, definite, firm and costed proposals on many of the issues of Indy. Eg the currency. They’ve had decades to think.

    Yet they don’t. They are still chucking out mad fag-packet ideas like that one last week from ‘a cartographer’.
    *Oh just convert all sterling mortgages to the new McShekel*

    They are emotionally committed to Indy. That is not in doubt. Yet they refuse to engage with it, practically and intellectually. Because down that road there are monsters they do not wish to confront, let alone reveal to the voters
    Yes, they have the same tactics as the Brexiteers. In order to win they have to be very vague as to what an indyScotland looks like in order to have as broad as possible coalition. They need to keep every one onboard, from those wanting to be in the Sterling zone, to those wanting to be in the Eurozone, to those wanting a Scottish currency.

    It is cakeism on steroids, but I think like Irish reunification, it is only a matter of time. There is simply too much divergence from English politics in both NI and Scotland.
    The difference being that there wasn't a Leaver government before the EU referendum but there is a SNP government in Scotland.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151
    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,801
    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    My off the wall prediction is that there will be a revival of unionism in the republic.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 45,006



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    To those who disagree with you, the answer is simple, and consists of two words.

    Basil D’Oliveira.
  • Get out your violins.

    Rudy Giuliani Is Reportedly Close to Broke—and Donald Trump Isn’t Taking His Calls. That’s what happens when you go to bat for a notoriously cheap, friendless, crappy businessman.

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/08/rudy-giuliani-broke-trump-fundraising-legal-bills/
  • spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    My off the wall prediction is that there will be a revival of unionism in the republic.
    How many "unionist" parties currently exist in the Republic?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,807

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    You might not have others have.
    Should all Johnson-skeptics be cancelled if one of them offends your sensitivities?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 5,586
    edited August 2021

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    The market at work:

    Aldi has increased its wages for lorry drivers amid a chronic shortage of drivers across the industry.

    The supermarket chain confirmed the rise following similar incentives by grocers to attract HGV drivers.

    The lack of drivers has caused disruption and delays in various supply chains, which has led to product shortages in some industries.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-58047483

    Yes but that's only good if there's more lorry drivers coming into the system. If there isn't the problem still remains.
    Wages rising will attract more lorry drivers to enter the system.

    If the problem remains, then wages haven't risen high enough yet.
    Hi Philip, completely off topic but I have a quick question.

    I’m looking at buying a new vacuum cleaner. I think you once said you had a Shark? If that’s so, what are they like?
    Wow you have a good memory.

    I'm very impressed by the Shark. Much better than the Dyson that it replaced. Would highly recommend, but please don't hold it against me if you don't like it.
    Oh, I won’t, don’t worry. I just wondered if it was any good. If it is, I’ll give one a go as they’re on offer at Amazon at the moment.

    Dust is the problem in my house, because I’m very bad at dusting. It keeps clogging up the vacuums I buy.
    You can get domestic air purifiers that are supposed to suck dust (and pollen etc) out of the air. Tbh I am still at the "vaguely thinking about it" stage (they aren't cheap) but mention it in case you've not seen them.

    Not getting clogged up by dust was the whole point of Dysons and similar, wasn't it? No filters and bags to get clogged. Good luck.
    I believe even Dysons have filters at some point. Always best to keep them as clear as possible.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 6,954

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    My off the wall prediction is that there will be a revival of unionism in the republic.
    How many "unionist" parties currently exist in the Republic?
    I’m sure there’s one somewhere with about 12 members who are also affiliated with the remaining Orange Lodge in Donegal.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,801

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    My off the wall prediction is that there will be a revival of unionism in the republic.
    How many "unionist" parties currently exist in the Republic?
    I don't mean as a live political project but more as an intellectual current.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 17,930
    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    No, I'd disagree with him. I don't think the fact that he's a racing driver should prevent him saying any of those things if they are legal ("imprison gays" is possibly stirring up hatred so might be the odd one out), Any more than I object to you saying any of them if you want to.

    It might well make me hope he didn't win, but maybe that just adds a bit of spice?

    If they had the same sort of rules as public order offences - do not display a message likely to cause disorder or fear - I could see that. But if he merely wanted to urge me to vote BNP, well, that's surely a matter for him.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    A party determined on Indy would, by now, have concrete, definite, firm and costed proposals on many of the issues of Indy. Eg the currency. They’ve had decades to think.

    Yet they don’t. They are still chucking out mad fag-packet ideas like that one last week from ‘a cartographer’.
    *Oh just convert all sterling mortgages to the new McShekel*

    They are emotionally committed to Indy. That is not in doubt. Yet they refuse to engage with it, practically and intellectually. Because down that road there are monsters they do not wish to confront, let alone reveal to the voters
    Yes, they have the same tactics as the Brexiteers. In order to win they have to be very vague as to what an indyScotland looks like in order to have as broad as possible coalition. They need to keep every one onboard, from those wanting to be in the Sterling zone, to those wanting to be in the Eurozone, to those wanting a Scottish currency.

    It is cakeism on steroids, but I think like Irish reunification, it is only a matter of time. There is simply too much divergence from English politics in both NI and Scotland.
    The difference being that there wasn't a Leaver government before the EU referendum but there is a SNP government in Scotland.
    Looking back, it’s quite amazing that Cameron didn’t demand a clear and definite analysis from Leave - as to what Leave would look like. In the single market or out? What about the Irish border? What about EU workers?

    If he’d done that - and he would have been completely justified, this being the biggest decision in recent British history - he would surely have won. His Etonian insouciance, his inner but unmerited confidence, really was his downfall
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,357
    edited August 2021
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    A party determined on Indy would, by now, have concrete, definite, firm and costed proposals on many of the issues of Indy. Eg the currency. They’ve had decades to think.

    Yet they don’t. They are still chucking out mad fag-packet ideas like that one last week from ‘a cartographer’.
    *Oh just convert all sterling mortgages to the new McShekel*

    They are emotionally committed to Indy. That is not in doubt. Yet they refuse to engage with it, practically and intellectually. Because down that road there are monsters they do not wish to confront, let alone reveal to the voters
    Yes, they have the same tactics as the Brexiteers. In order to win they have to be very vague as to what an indyScotland looks like in order to have as broad as possible coalition. They need to keep every one onboard, from those wanting to be in the Sterling zone, to those wanting to be in the Eurozone, to those wanting a Scottish currency.

    It is cakeism on steroids, but I think like Irish reunification, it is only a matter of time. There is simply too much divergence from English politics in both NI and Scotland.
    It isn't, for starters the only way a UK government will ever allow a legal indyref2 now is with a Labour PM who would also offer devomax, thus reducing the divergence between English and Scottish politics anyway.

    As for NI, while the majority Catholic counties on the Irish border may eventually unite with the Republic, the diehard Protestant and Unionist parts like Antrim, East Londonderry, East Belfast and much of Down will never agree to rule by Dublin
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 21,866

    Alistair said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    if they wanted Indiref2 they'd have brought forward a referendum by now. Their best chance has already passed (during TMs time as PM). they could have agreed to her deal and had it as a condition.

    Also, as others on here have said, they've done nothing to convince more people that SInd is the best thing for Scotland. They've just done the grievance thing.
    They couldn't have possibly agreed to an Indyref as a condition for agreeing May's Deal.

    That is absolute insaninty. Just think of the implications for both May and Sturgeon.
    Wasn't that a Wings bright idea at one point?
    Yes "but the Analysis" thought that the SNP voting with the Tories was a winning move.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,807
    edited August 2021
    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's completely different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 45,006

    Get out your violins.

    Rudy Giuliani Is Reportedly Close to Broke—and Donald Trump Isn’t Taking His Calls. That’s what happens when you go to bat for a notoriously cheap, friendless, crappy businessman.

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/08/rudy-giuliani-broke-trump-fundraising-legal-bills/

    I don’t have a violin small enough for that.

    But why doesn’t he sue Amazon Prime for back pay over that porno Sacha Baron Cohen film he did?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151
    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 17,304
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    A party determined on Indy would, by now, have concrete, definite, firm and costed proposals on many of the issues of Indy. Eg the currency. They’ve had decades to think.

    Yet they don’t. They are still chucking out mad fag-packet ideas like that one last week from ‘a cartographer’.
    *Oh just convert all sterling mortgages to the new McShekel*

    They are emotionally committed to Indy. That is not in doubt. Yet they refuse to engage with it, practically and intellectually. Because down that road there are monsters they do not wish to confront, let alone reveal to the voters
    Yes, they have the same tactics as the Brexiteers. In order to win they have to be very vague as to what an indyScotland looks like in order to have as broad as possible coalition. They need to keep every one onboard, from those wanting to be in the Sterling zone, to those wanting to be in the Eurozone, to those wanting a Scottish currency.

    It is cakeism on steroids, but I think like Irish reunification, it is only a matter of time. There is simply too much divergence from English politics in both NI and Scotland.
    The difference being that there wasn't a Leaver government before the EU referendum but there is a SNP government in Scotland.
    Looking back, it’s quite amazing that Cameron didn’t demand a clear and definite analysis from Leave - as to what Leave would look like. In the single market or out? What about the Irish border? What about EU workers?

    If he’d done that - and he would have been completely justified, this being the biggest decision in recent British history - he would surely have won. His Etonian insouciance, his inner but unmerited confidence, really was his downfall
    He wanted the referendum over double quick. So the Tory Party could unite for a 2020 election.
    There was no time for detail or nuance.
    Ironically, they United a year late. And against Davey Boy.
    Too clever by half.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's wholly different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
    QED. You see them as ‘negative’ because you disagree with them. You only approve of political statements you approve. Lefties are so fricking stupid it’s BORING
  • Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    Four of the six counties now have a Catholic/Nationalist majority.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,801
    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    It also poses very difficult questions for the Irish constitution. They'd need to completely revise the current version to accommodate something like the Good Friday Agreement settlement.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 45,006
    Leon said:

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's wholly different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
    QED. You see them as ‘negative’ because you disagree with them. You only approve of political statements you approve. Lefties are so fricking stupid it’s BORING
    Three of your examples incite physical harm to various groups.

    Vettel’s slogan didn’t.

    There is a difference there.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's wholly different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
    QED. You see them as ‘negative’ because you disagree with them. You only approve of political statements you approve. Lefties are so fricking stupid it’s BORING
    What's so "negative" about Vettel's "Same Love" message? Ta.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    No, I'd disagree with him. I don't think the fact that he's a racing driver should prevent him saying any of those things if they are legal ("imprison gays" is possibly stirring up hatred so might be the odd one out), Any more than I object to you saying any of them if you want to.

    It might well make me hope he didn't win, but maybe that just adds a bit of spice?

    If they had the same sort of rules as public order offences - do not display a message likely to cause disorder or fear - I could see that. But if he merely wanted to urge me to vote BNP, well, that's surely a matter for him.
    I disagree. But I won’t make an issue of it. I quite like the new PB where you and I are so old, even though we are opposed, we somehow rub along. Like two once-feuding pensioners in the same pub, just occasionally muttering slurs, but also contentedly playing cribbage at the same time
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 31,056
    edited August 2021

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    My off the wall prediction is that there will be a revival of unionism in the republic.
    How many "unionist" parties currently exist in the Republic?
    I don't mean as a live political project but more as an intellectual current.
    Ruth Dudley Edwards lives in the Republic doesn't she? Certainly writes regularly for the Sunday Independent. Providing an intellectual current would be an interesting way to describe her output.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 13,807

    Get out your violins.

    Rudy Giuliani Is Reportedly Close to Broke—and Donald Trump Isn’t Taking His Calls. That’s what happens when you go to bat for a notoriously cheap, friendless, crappy businessman.

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/08/rudy-giuliani-broke-trump-fundraising-legal-bills/

    It is sad, as Giuliano hit all the right notes after 9/11.

    There again, trying to steal a presidential election is quite naughty.
  • Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    It also poses very difficult questions for the Irish constitution. They'd need to completely revise the current version to accommodate something like the Good Friday Agreement settlement.
    Ireland dropped its formal claim to NI as part of that settlement.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteenth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's wholly different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
    QED. You see them as ‘negative’ because you disagree with them. You only approve of political statements you approve. Lefties are so fricking stupid it’s BORING
    Three of your examples incite physical harm to various groups.

    Vettel’s slogan didn’t.

    There is a difference there.
    Jail is not physical harm. It’s judicial punishment - and the law in many countries, especially Islamic. Expelling illegal immigrants is, likewise, not a physical threat, just a promise of firm borders. And so forth.
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    There clearly needs to be change in the constitutional status of NI as the assembly isn't working. No-one is prepared to reopen the GFA to resolve the issues. SF will continue to push for the border poll and it might win. the current situation in regards to the EU isn't full EU membership and, as much as people won't admit it in the government, neither is it full membership of the UK. that won't work long term and NI will eventually have to choose one or the other.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 38,801

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    It also poses very difficult questions for the Irish constitution. They'd need to completely revise the current version to accommodate something like the Good Friday Agreement settlement.
    Ireland dropped its formal claim to NI as part of that settlement.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteenth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland
    Yes, but I suspect that unification would involve a formal claim to Northern Ireland, don't you?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 12,032

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    You might not have others have.
    The case against Johnson is that he conspired with Gove and Cummings to procure Brexit when none of them wanted or believed in it, and all of them thought it would advance them personally. The key is not whether you think Brexit is a good thing or a bad thing, it's what they thought about it. That is about as evil as it gets, short of Fred West or falling foul of the Godwin principle, and compared to that I thing satirical comment on his goings on with that pound shop Clara Petacci woman are pretty small beer.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 31,056
    Alistair said:

    Alistair said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    spudgfsh said:

    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    malcolmg said:

    If there is no further vote on Independence whilst there is Tory Govt and wee Jimmy Krankie throws her toys of of her pram in Holyrood.. who cares? Few I would venture to suggest, bar diehard Nits.
    There is still the prospect of the law courts causing problems in Scotland.

    Sturgeon does not want a referendum, that is painfully obvious to a blind man.
    Is it she does not want one, or that she does not care when it happens (since she is riding on top regardless and can afford to wait), or is worried if it is lost?
    Worried if it is lost.

    Just imagine the Unionists prevail again and Scotland votes No, that really would settle it for a generation.
    That might make some sense if the SNP and Scottish Government had made any attempt to move the independence debate on in the last parliament, but they didn't.

    And their visceral reaction to Alba (and most of the indy bloggers who decided the SNP were just beginning to take the piss) basically just suggested that they were only really afraid someone else might come along and threaten their very cosy position. OK, one does not expect them to roll out the welcome mat, but they went OTT.

    The SNP use independence as a cheap GOTV tactic in an election (and there's always another one of them to come along in a minute...) but there's little evidence to suggest anything other than that at the moment.

    Oh, and being skint also seems to be a handy reason for not wanting to do anything to progress independence at any pace other than glacial.
    Agreed 100%. I recommend that fellow PBers read Indyref threads and comments with the mindset that Sturgeon’s SNP don’t want independence, but daren’t admit it.
    This view keeps being put forward - both by Scots and non Scots on here - backed by no evidence other than a presumed ability to read the mind of Nicola Sturgeon. A mind that apparently harbours thoughts and desires totally at odds with those she expresses.

    I think you’re all talking bollocks. She does want Sindy. It's the basis of her whole political career. It's just a matter of how best to get there. She has to balance the risks and rewards of various courses of action. Essentially the challenge is to build momentum and force a Referendum at a time when it's winnable. It's a massive challenge but I think if anyone can do it she can.
    That's partially true:
    1) All politicians want power and NS is no different. She knows that losing an IndiRef will be the end of her career.
    2) She also knows that another referendum will be as close as the last one
    3) keeping herself primarily and the SNP secondarily in power is what matters and using an Indiref is a good mechanism to do this.

    if they wanted independence they would have spend more of the last 7 years actually convincing people of its merits rather than just using it as a grievance to GotV.
    Last 7 years -

    2014 - they had a vote and lost it. No choice but to take a pause.

    2016 - EU ref. Leave. Oh yikes.

    Next 3 years. Brexit wrangling. SNP build the grievance of being ignored. Put Sindy back on the agenda.

    COVID PANDEMIC rudely interrupts everything.

    2021. Win Holyrood election with Sindy2 commitment.

    Say it must happen once the Sickness is gone.

    This looks to me like somebody seriously pursuing the cause of Scottish Independence.
    if they wanted Indiref2 they'd have brought forward a referendum by now. Their best chance has already passed (during TMs time as PM). they could have agreed to her deal and had it as a condition.

    Also, as others on here have said, they've done nothing to convince more people that SInd is the best thing for Scotland. They've just done the grievance thing.
    They couldn't have possibly agreed to an Indyref as a condition for agreeing May's Deal.

    That is absolute insaninty. Just think of the implications for both May and Sturgeon.
    Wasn't that a Wings bright idea at one point?
    Yes "but the Analysis" thought that the SNP voting with the Tories was a winning move.
    Tragic that Sturge and the SNP made the fatal mistake of voting against the BJ Brexit deal. The PB Brexityoons were definitely right that that was the beginning of the end for them.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 45,006
    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's wholly different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
    QED. You see them as ‘negative’ because you disagree with them. You only approve of political statements you approve. Lefties are so fricking stupid it’s BORING
    Three of your examples incite physical harm to various groups.

    Vettel’s slogan didn’t.

    There is a difference there.
    Jail is not physical harm. It’s judicial punishment - and the law in many countries, especially Islamic. Expelling illegal immigrants is, likewise, not a physical threat, just a promise of firm borders. And so forth.
    You think those two don’t involve elements of physical harm?

    Well, it’s a view.

    Maybe you should put it on a T-shirt...
  • Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    It also poses very difficult questions for the Irish constitution. They'd need to completely revise the current version to accommodate something like the Good Friday Agreement settlement.
    Ireland dropped its formal claim to NI as part of that settlement.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteenth_Amendment_of_the_Constitution_of_Ireland
    Yes, but I suspect that unification would involve a formal claim to Northern Ireland, don't you?
    "It also provided a mechanism for a further amendment to the Constitution upon a declaration by the government on the implementation of the Agreement, most notably by changing Articles 2 and 3 from an irredentist claim on the whole island of Ireland to an aspiration towards creating a united Ireland by peaceful means, "with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island"."
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,357
    edited August 2021
    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    There clearly needs to be change in the constitutional status of NI as the assembly isn't working. No-one is prepared to reopen the GFA to resolve the issues. SF will continue to push for the border poll and it might win. the current situation in regards to the EU isn't full EU membership and, as much as people won't admit it in the government, neither is it full membership of the UK. that won't work long term and NI will eventually have to choose one or the other.
    Or else PM Starmer gets in and aligns GB back closer to the single market and customs union, effectively removing the Irish Sea border anyway and largely restoring the GB and Ireland single market as was the case pre Brexit
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,578
    Eric Topol
    @EricTopol
    ·
    56m
    Today, Canada surpassed Israel for fully vaccinated, a very high bar. Congratulations 🇨🇦
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's wholly different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
    QED. You see them as ‘negative’ because you disagree with them. You only approve of political statements you approve. Lefties are so fricking stupid it’s BORING
    Three of your examples incite physical harm to various groups.

    Vettel’s slogan didn’t.

    There is a difference there.
    Jail is not physical harm. It’s judicial punishment - and the law in many countries, especially Islamic. Expelling illegal immigrants is, likewise, not a physical threat, just a promise of firm borders. And so forth.
    You think those two don’t involve elements of physical harm?

    Well, it’s a view.

    Maybe you should put it on a T-shirt...
    I’m pretty sure ‘expel illegal immigrants’ is simply a pithy way of expressing British law, as it stands, right now

    It’s quite telling that PB lefties nonetheless think this is a violent, threatening statement which cannot be allowed on a t-shirt, whereas all the nice fluffy lefty opinions they agree with are, by pure coincidence, totally acceptable
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,357

    Get out your violins.

    Rudy Giuliani Is Reportedly Close to Broke—and Donald Trump Isn’t Taking His Calls. That’s what happens when you go to bat for a notoriously cheap, friendless, crappy businessman.

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/08/rudy-giuliani-broke-trump-fundraising-legal-bills/

    Trump has also dumped Jeb Bush's son George P Bush in his bid for Texas AG, despite calling him 'the only Bush that likes me' and endorsed the incumbent Trump loyalist Ken Paxton instead. Clearly he wants to ensure brand Trump displaces brand Bush as the premier royalty in the GOP

    https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/07/trump-stiffs-george-p-bush-the-only-bush-that-likes-me/
  • LeonLeon Posts: 15,151
    IshmaelZ said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    You might not have others have.
    The case against Johnson is that he conspired with Gove and Cummings to procure Brexit when none of them wanted or believed in it, and all of them thought it would advance them personally. The key is not whether you think Brexit is a good thing or a bad thing, it's what they thought about it. That is about as evil as it gets, short of Fred West or falling foul of the Godwin principle, and compared to that I thing satirical comment on his goings on with that pound shop Clara Petacci woman are pretty small beer.
    I am 100% sure that Boris and Cummings both believed - and believe - in Brexit. I personally have evidence of this. That they also believed it would advance their careers is probably true, but by the by. With Gove I am slightly less sure
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    HYUFD said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    There clearly needs to be change in the constitutional status of NI as the assembly isn't working. No-one is prepared to reopen the GFA to resolve the issues. SF will continue to push for the border poll and it might win. the current situation in regards to the EU isn't full EU membership and, as much as people won't admit it in the government, neither is it full membership of the UK. that won't work long term and NI will eventually have to choose one or the other.
    Or else PM Starmer gets in and aligns GB back closer to the single market and customs union, effectively removing the Irish Sea border anyway and largely restoring the GB and Ireland single market as was the case pre Brexit
    The EU are not going to want to significantly renegotiate any time soon. and Labour would lose a GE in England with an explicit position to do so.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 93,357
    edited August 2021
    spudgfsh said:

    HYUFD said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    There clearly needs to be change in the constitutional status of NI as the assembly isn't working. No-one is prepared to reopen the GFA to resolve the issues. SF will continue to push for the border poll and it might win. the current situation in regards to the EU isn't full EU membership and, as much as people won't admit it in the government, neither is it full membership of the UK. that won't work long term and NI will eventually have to choose one or the other.
    Or else PM Starmer gets in and aligns GB back closer to the single market and customs union, effectively removing the Irish Sea border anyway and largely restoring the GB and Ireland single market as was the case pre Brexit
    The EU are not going to want to significantly renegotiate any time soon. and Labour would lose a GE in England with an explicit position to do so.
    Labour would lose a GE in England in 2024 certainly but not necessarily in the UK, it is perfectly possible the Tories win another majority in England next time but Starmer gets in thanks to Welsh Labour MPs and SNP support.

    As long as Starmer then accepted more single market and customs union regulation the EU would agree a closer alignment again, even if not full SM membership as before absent FOM
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 15,589
    edited August 2021
    I know it has already caught the eye of others, but I was genuinely heartened by Sebastian Vettel. To turn up in Hungary after their government passed their gay hate law wearing full pride gear was genuinely wonderful.

    There are too many pillocks attacking sportspeople for using their visibility to attack what they see as wrongs - mainly because the pillocks don't like people calling them pillocks. For me, if you can't use fame for good then what is the point in fame?

    https://twitter.com/ESPNF1/status/1421815588012412928
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 52,804
    edited August 2021
    SKY have completely removed this story from their website - but it's still on Yahoo:

    The decrease in the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases released by the government each day "looks a bit fishy", according to a leading symptoms researcher whose study has shown infections are on the rise.

    Professor Tim Spector, who co-founded the ZOE COVID Symptom Study app, said a "sudden drop" in people testing positive for the virus in the government's data is "very suspicious".


    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/covid-19-uks-daily-coronavirus-073200716.html

    Here's Eric the panicker's tweet about it:

    https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1420822158092218371?s=20
  • Alternate history Olympic question:

    If GB had reached its 'traditional' level of 5 golds and 20 total medals in 1996 would we have continued to reach that level ? Or was it the 1996 failure that prompted change leading to the success of 2000 onwards.

    Provocative Olympic fact pointing:

    Has anyone noticed that the GB swimming success has been entirely male and that the GB rowing fiasco (beyond the comedy steering) was female ?
  • NorthofStokeNorthofStoke Posts: 1,153
    Although it might be wishful thinking on my part I believe that Brexit has made Scottish Independence less likely. It isn't just the issue of the border if Scotland wish to join the Eu and rUK wish to remain outside. The main Brexit effect is that more people are better informed on trade deals, borders, currency, citizenship and residency rights as a result of the Brexit process. As a result he problems of separating Scotland from the UK will not be easily avoided during the campaign. Who on this site can honestly say they haven't learnt from Brexit about these issues?
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 12,032
    Leon said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    You might not have others have.
    The case against Johnson is that he conspired with Gove and Cummings to procure Brexit when none of them wanted or believed in it, and all of them thought it would advance them personally. The key is not whether you think Brexit is a good thing or a bad thing, it's what they thought about it. That is about as evil as it gets, short of Fred West or falling foul of the Godwin principle, and compared to that I thing satirical comment on his goings on with that pound shop Clara Petacci woman are pretty small beer.
    I am 100% sure that Boris and Cummings both believed - and believe - in Brexit. I personally have evidence of this. That they also believed it would advance their careers is probably true, but by the by. With Gove I am slightly less sure
    If you say so. Hard to believe, looking at the Johnson Gove morning after video (and pleeeeease don't tell me they were secretly upset because they had just learned of Dave's resignation).

    Anyway, I'll shift my ground to accomodate you. Even if they believed in it, advancing the 350m per week claim makes them a bunch of thoroughly evil and unscrupulous little shits, and the only limit on what anybody says about Johnson on here should be what one can get past the mods.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 45,006
    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's wholly different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
    QED. You see them as ‘negative’ because you disagree with them. You only approve of political statements you approve. Lefties are so fricking stupid it’s BORING
    Three of your examples incite physical harm to various groups.

    Vettel’s slogan didn’t.

    There is a difference there.
    Jail is not physical harm. It’s judicial punishment - and the law in many countries, especially Islamic. Expelling illegal immigrants is, likewise, not a physical threat, just a promise of firm borders. And so forth.
    You think those two don’t involve elements of physical harm?

    Well, it’s a view.

    Maybe you should put it on a T-shirt...
    I’m pretty sure ‘expel illegal immigrants’ is simply a pithy way of expressing British law, as it stands, right now

    It’s quite telling that PB lefties nonetheless think this is a violent, threatening statement which cannot be allowed on a t-shirt, whereas all the nice fluffy lefty opinions they agree with are, by pure coincidence, totally acceptable
    Am I a leftie?

    Well, if you say so...
  • spudgfshspudgfsh Posts: 1,079
    HYUFD said:

    spudgfsh said:

    HYUFD said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    There clearly needs to be change in the constitutional status of NI as the assembly isn't working. No-one is prepared to reopen the GFA to resolve the issues. SF will continue to push for the border poll and it might win. the current situation in regards to the EU isn't full EU membership and, as much as people won't admit it in the government, neither is it full membership of the UK. that won't work long term and NI will eventually have to choose one or the other.
    Or else PM Starmer gets in and aligns GB back closer to the single market and customs union, effectively removing the Irish Sea border anyway and largely restoring the GB and Ireland single market as was the case pre Brexit
    The EU are not going to want to significantly renegotiate any time soon. and Labour would lose a GE in England with an explicit position to do so.
    Labour would lose a GE in England in 2024 certainly but not necessarily in the UK, it is perfectly possible the Tories win another majority in England next time but Starmer gets in thanks to Welsh Labour MPs and SNP support.

    As long as Starmer then accepted more single market and customs union regulation the EU would agree a closer alignment again, even if not full SM membership as before absent FOM
    The EU wouldn't do it, and would say so when it was floated. The most they'd offer is EFTA which most leavers wouldn't vote for.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 2,632

    Eric Topol
    @EricTopol
    ·
    56m
    Today, Canada surpassed Israel for fully vaccinated, a very high bar. Congratulations 🇨🇦

    Canada, are doing well, but they have not surpassed Israel for fully vaccinated, at lease not according to the Blomberg tracker, where they are a little behind the UK:

    https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=content&utm_content=covidtracker2021&fbclid=IwAR106hsY9pDIO17b3-Dr-0qd9MJu80vs-F6i7JMfkaCUW6IaZJM_cn5cWVY
  • SKY have completely removed this story from their website - but it's still on Yahoo:

    The decrease in the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases released by the government each day "looks a bit fishy", according to a leading symptoms researcher whose study has shown infections are on the rise.

    Professor Tim Spector, who co-founded the ZOE COVID Symptom Study app, said a "sudden drop" in people testing positive for the virus in the government's data is "very suspicious".


    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/covid-19-uks-daily-coronavirus-073200716.html

    Here's Eric the panicker's tweet about it:

    https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1420822158092218371?s=20

    Does Eric Ding-Dong know that Zoe has been showing falling numbers of new cases for a while ?
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 1,036
    Any Indyref poll with a devomax option would be interesting. Don’t think there’s been one for a while.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,654
    IshmaelZ said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    You might not have others have.
    The case against Johnson is that he conspired with Gove and Cummings to procure Brexit when none of them wanted or believed in it, and all of them thought it would advance them personally. The key is not whether you think Brexit is a good thing or a bad thing, it's what they thought about it. That is about as evil as it gets, short of Fred West or falling foul of the Godwin principle, and compared to that I thing satirical comment on his goings on with that pound shop Clara Petacci woman are pretty small beer.
    Be my guest, but expect to be called out on it. Tony Blair was worse than Johnson. Millions died because of him .
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 46,578
    Don't pack away those masks just yet...


    "As expected, we found that a fast rate of vaccination decreases the probability of emergence of a resistant strain. Counterintuitively, when a relaxation of non-pharmaceutical interventions happened at a time when most individuals of the population have already been vaccinated the probability of emergence of a resistant strain was greatly increased. Consequently, we show that a period of transmission reduction close to the end of the vaccination campaign can substantially reduce the probability of resistant strain establishment. Our results suggest that policymakers and individuals should consider maintaining non-pharmaceutical interventions and transmission-reducing behaviours throughout the entire vaccination period."

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-95025-3
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 6,954
    spudgfsh said:

    HYUFD said:

    spudgfsh said:

    HYUFD said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    spudgfsh said:

    Leon said:

    My bet is that the UK will still be here in 20 years and people will still be predicting its imminent dissolution

    GB may still be intact but the UK may no longer include NI. as opposed to the SNP, SF have a defined end state for NI without most of the messy bits. They may also be able to convince the UK government to keep contributing for an extended period.
    I am pretty sure NI will stay ‘British’ because of the threat of violence - from both sides

    I can foresee some form of dual sovereignty that fudges the issue, however. Ulster is nearly there already - they get the best of both worlds. EU and UK citizenship. Free Movement but also the UK market, access to London, British universities, etc
    That requires the current situation for NI actually working, or the EU & UK finding a way of making it work. There is evidence at the moment that it's not working and no evidence that the EU or UK are prepared to change their positions. unlike for Scotland there is a treaty which has been signed by the UK government which determines if and when a referendum (border poll) can happen and how often. SF will get their border poll, especially if they can show that the NI assembly will not work in it's current form.
    I completely disagree. Look at the ‘border in the Irish sea’ which potentially meant no British biscuits in Belfast Tesco’s. That got the loyalist paramilitaries murmuring about violence and suddenly everyone had 2nd thoughts

    A border poll would be that times a thousand. Especially if it looked like unification might win. Guaranteed return to the Troubles. No one wants that, not even Sinn Fein

    It will be fudged for the foreseeable future
    There clearly needs to be change in the constitutional status of NI as the assembly isn't working. No-one is prepared to reopen the GFA to resolve the issues. SF will continue to push for the border poll and it might win. the current situation in regards to the EU isn't full EU membership and, as much as people won't admit it in the government, neither is it full membership of the UK. that won't work long term and NI will eventually have to choose one or the other.
    Or else PM Starmer gets in and aligns GB back closer to the single market and customs union, effectively removing the Irish Sea border anyway and largely restoring the GB and Ireland single market as was the case pre Brexit
    The EU are not going to want to significantly renegotiate any time soon. and Labour would lose a GE in England with an explicit position to do so.
    Labour would lose a GE in England in 2024 certainly but not necessarily in the UK, it is perfectly possible the Tories win another majority in England next time but Starmer gets in thanks to Welsh Labour MPs and SNP support.

    As long as Starmer then accepted more single market and customs union regulation the EU would agree a closer alignment again, even if not full SM membership as before absent FOM
    The EU wouldn't do it, and would say so when it was floated. The most they'd offer is EFTA which most leavers wouldn't vote for.
    I’m not sure that’s right. They moan about the Swiss arrangement but that survives. I see something similar for England in the future.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 99,703
    edited August 2021
    Vettel disqualified.

    Hamilton up to second.

    https://twitter.com/F1/status/1421926010342236160
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 12,032
    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's wholly different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
    QED. You see them as ‘negative’ because you disagree with them. You only approve of political statements you approve. Lefties are so fricking stupid it’s BORING
    Three of your examples incite physical harm to various groups.

    Vettel’s slogan didn’t.

    There is a difference there.
    Jail is not physical harm. It’s judicial punishment - and the law in many countries, especially Islamic. Expelling illegal immigrants is, likewise, not a physical threat, just a promise of firm borders. And so forth.
    You think those two don’t involve elements of physical harm?

    Well, it’s a view.

    Maybe you should put it on a T-shirt...
    I’m pretty sure ‘expel illegal immigrants’ is simply a pithy way of expressing British law, as it stands, right now

    It’s quite telling that PB lefties nonetheless think this is a violent, threatening statement which cannot be allowed on a t-shirt, whereas all the nice fluffy lefty opinions they agree with are, by pure coincidence, totally acceptable
    Am I a leftie?

    Well, if you say so...
    Not sure what it says about whom, that we hit Leon with a right-and-left "if you say so" in simultaneous posts.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 19,094
    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    ydoethur said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:



    “I haven’t spoken to anyone particularly about it but I think it is lingering,” he said. “I remember the effects when I had it. The training has been different since then and the levels of fatigue you get are different and it’s a real challenge. So [I am] just continuing to try and train and prepare the best way I can. Who knows what it is today? Maybe it’s hydration but I’ve definitely not had that experience. I had something similar in Silverstone but this is way worse.”

    Hamilton also gave his wholehearted support to Sebastian Vettel who was issued with a reprimand by the FIA for not removing his rainbow-coloured T-shirt with the words “Same Love” on it, in support of the LGBTQ+ community in Hungary who are being targeted by repressive laws.

    https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/aug/01/lewis-hamilton-fears-he-has-long-covid-after-hungarian-gp-exhaustion?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

    Poor guy.

    On the politics side, I think the attempt by sporting associations to suppress competitors' wish to express opinions is getting oppressive. I get that some people may not like some slogans and gestures, and maybe it'll affect their support and they'll hope someone else wins. But taking part in a sport shouldn't be like joining the civil service, never to express an opinion again. Vettel has a view? Fine, get over it. And I'd say the same if he had the opposite view.
    No, you wouldn’t

    If a driver had a t-shirt saying ‘imprison gays’ or ‘expel illegal immigrants’ or ‘vote BNP’ or ‘hang cop killers’ you’d denounce him, despite these opinions being perfectly legal, and, in some cases, quite common
    That's wholly different.

    Vettel's message is wholly positive, yours (quoted) are generally negative. A more appropriate comparison would be, say, a pro-Trump T-Shirt. I suspect exactly the same reprimand would have been issued, and there would be plenty condemning the reprimand.
    QED. You see them as ‘negative’ because you disagree with them. You only approve of political statements you approve. Lefties are so fricking stupid it’s BORING
    Three of your examples incite physical harm to various groups.

    Vettel’s slogan didn’t.

    There is a difference there.
    Jail is not physical harm. It’s judicial punishment - and the law in many countries, especially Islamic. Expelling illegal immigrants is, likewise, not a physical threat, just a promise of firm borders. And so forth.
    You think those two don’t involve elements of physical harm?

    Well, it’s a view.

    Maybe you should put it on a T-shirt...
    I’m pretty sure ‘expel illegal immigrants’ is simply a pithy way of expressing British law, as it stands, right now

    It’s quite telling that PB lefties nonetheless think this is a violent, threatening statement which cannot be allowed on a t-shirt, whereas all the nice fluffy lefty opinions they agree with are, by pure coincidence, totally acceptable
    I take it you don't agree with Vettel's support for LGBTQ+ rights in Hungary?
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 6,954

    SKY have completely removed this story from their website - but it's still on Yahoo:

    The decrease in the number of confirmed COVID-19 cases released by the government each day "looks a bit fishy", according to a leading symptoms researcher whose study has shown infections are on the rise.

    Professor Tim Spector, who co-founded the ZOE COVID Symptom Study app, said a "sudden drop" in people testing positive for the virus in the government's data is "very suspicious".


    https://uk.news.yahoo.com/covid-19-uks-daily-coronavirus-073200716.html

    Here's Eric the panicker's tweet about it:

    https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1420822158092218371?s=20

    Meanwhile Zoe has started to snow day on day drops in newly sick - a big one today of about 4,000
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 45,006
    edited August 2021

    IshmaelZ said:

    isam said:

    Stocky said:

    @MarqueeMark just read your post this morning.

    Even I, who doesn't rate Johnson as PM, agree that the anti-Johnson criticism on here is incessant and often pathological - but please don't leave the site.

    Seconded.. Stuart Dixon started off in filthy mode this morning. I pointed out to him that he wouldn't like it if La Sturgeon was so castigated.
    Why is Starmer is c*** acceptable yet Johnson is c*** is unacceptable?

    What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander, surely?
    Do people say how disgusted they are at the thought of Sir Keir’s wife sleeping with him? I can’t remember it.
    I have never said that.

    My beef with Johnson is, that in my opinion, he chose what was best for himself, rather than what he thought was best for the country.

    Additionally I wouldn't run my personal life in the way he runs his, and I don't think he is a good role model, but that is entirely his own business.
    You might not have others have.
    The case against Johnson is that he conspired with Gove and Cummings to procure Brexit when none of them wanted or believed in it, and all of them thought it would advance them personally. The key is not whether you think Brexit is a good thing or a bad thing, it's what they thought about it. That is about as evil as it gets, short of Fred West or falling foul of the Godwin principle, and compared to that I thing satirical comment on his goings on with that pound shop Clara Petacci woman are pretty small beer.
    Be my guest, but expect to be called out on it. Tony Blair was worse than Johnson. Millions died because of him .
    ‘Millions?’ Really?

    I despise Tony Blair with all my heart, but can we please not exaggerate?

    Hundreds of thousands died in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those wars would have happened anyway, with or without Blair. They might even have happened with or without Bush, although I think he’s much more to blame.

    To suggest he was personally responsible for millions of deaths is simple hyperbole.

    Edit - and let’s not forget Johnson voted for the Iraq war as well.
This discussion has been closed.