Howdy, Stranger!

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

Punters increasingly think Trump will be the WH2024 GOP nominee – politicalbetting.com

1356

Comments

  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 1,668
    MaxPB said:

    Also.....

    A 3D-printed head has shown that while Apple's Face ID is a secure biometric authentication system, other facial recognition systems used by Android-based smartphones are able to be fooled and unlocked by the fake cranium.

    https://appleinsider.com/articles/18/12/17/face-id-not-fooled-in-fake-head-test-while-android-rivals-fail

    Yes, it's because they use a Sony ToF sensor for Face ID, Samsung just uses a standard 2D camera. The technology is just completely different.
    Even so, I presume that with sufficiently low level access biometrics could be compromised by a replay attack?
  • AslanAslan Posts: 702
    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    On topic, if Trump wants the nomination, he will get it and it is increasingly clear he does. Also, he is playing a smart game by keeping relatively quiet. That might not be a popular idea on here given the consensus that Trump is a stupid buffoon but he is a lot smarter than many give him credit for.

    There was also a good piece by Conrad Black today, which won’t please many on here but the link is below. With regards to his comments on the 2020 election, they will make many here choke but, quite frankly, that’s not important - this is what the GOP is thinking about what happened in November:

    https://amgreatness.com/2021/09/27/democrats-repeat-the-mistakes-of-2016/

    Final point. I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means ie his election will be illegitimate. Ironically, there is a fair bit of overlap between those who are the strongest in pushing this view and those who are most shrill about saying how the GOP’s conduct remains the biggest threat to American democracy. It doesn’t seem to occur to many on here that Trump may win because people will be sick of Biden’s incompetence but it is worrying that we are starting to see the building blocks being out in place to claim any Trump 2024 win is, by default, illegitimate.

    "I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means"

    Really?

    Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't seen a single comment along those lines.

    Presumably you have plenty of examples.
    I can see how it might be interpreted that way and some my comments might be close to saying that. But it is spectacularly missing the point.

    The election of a President who sets out to win by cheating is a threat to democracy whether they win by cheating or if they would have won anyway without cheating. The Trump Republicans are setting out to cheat.
    I don't follow US politics closely. How exactly are they going to cheat?
    The Republicans have been cheating for years. Gerrymandering did not start with Trump, and nor did vote suppression.
    The Democrats have been enthusiastic gerrymanderers for years.

    That being said, it is great that a number of States have implemented measures to limit the ability of lawmakers to set boundaries that benefit themselves. It is notable (ah hem, @MrEd) that Democratic states have been better* at putting in place independent bodies. It's one of the reasons why the Dems need to win the House by a surprisingly large percentage points margin to hold it.

    * Not universally better; Democratic Maryland has historically been a pretty terrible gerrymanderer
    Unilaterally ending gerrymandering in a blue states would be catastrophic for the Dems. The right thing to do is to ban it nationally, which the Dems have been trying to do and the Republicans have fought. In addition, Republican justices vote to not hear cases about it.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 21,319
    Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    glw said:

    I had a phone call from my bank recently. Would I answer some questions about recent changes to my current account terms and conditions? Sure, okay. First I have to ask you some security questions. Er, how can I be sure you're really from the bank?

    The system is absurd.

    Banks and credit card companies have some of the worst security going. UK banks have recently enabled SMS for authenticating card not present transactions, even though using SMS for such purposes is something standards organisations have deprecated for years now. Bank are effectively subcontracing the security of your bank accounts to your mobile carrier, who in turn have farmed out the leg work to someone in a call centre overseas or a teenager in a store doing a Saturday job. You would be hard pressed to come up with something worse.

    No bank to the best of my knowledge offers security as good as you can get from a Google, Microsoft, or Apple account, and in some cases you can get their best security options for free.
    Ten years ago the buzz was that passwords would be quickly replaced by biometrics such as eye scans or fingerprints. Why arent we using those more? (Genuine question, not saying we should or shouldn't).
    My bank app uses face recognition.
    mine uses fingerprints. but in both cases they are just relying on the phone, presumably? Chinese phone in my case, I wrongly thought it was from taiwan, and I'd have thought twice if i knew it was PRC.

    It also uses voice recognition on the phone.
    I'd have thought the OS was more important... presumably Android, so Google developed and controlled in the US right?
    No, not unless you wipe the phone completely and install a clean version. Even then it is relatively easy to have the hardware programmed to compromise the OS. Lenovo did it with their laptops.

    I'd never use biometrics for an app as they can't be changed if compromised. PINs and the like (painful though they might be) can.
    The joys of Android, I guess. Although I can't see why Google couldn't close those OS shortcomings.
    Because they let each manufacturer roll their own version of Android - including the Chinese ones.

    I’d be quite wary of using any Chinese brand Android phone for banking stuff, to be honest.
    I would unequivocally not use a Chinese phone.
  • gealbhan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Jeremy Cliffe
    @JeremyCliffe
    1h
    As a rule of thumb, you can usually learn something about what is really going on in German politics by watching where Markus Söder's tactical sensors are leading him. And he seems to think that Armin Laschet is toast.

    https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1442851399344271361?s=20

    If Union get right into ein Aderlass is that the prospect of any sort of coalition oot the window, or would getting rid of Laschet improve their chances?

    If Laschet somehow cobbles together a coalition of the losers to become the next chancellor, a chance the CSU might start to lose Bavaria tbh.

    KANZLERFRAGE | Umfrage zur Kanzlerpräferenz Forsa/RTL/n-tv

    Scholz (SPD): 56% (+28)
    Laschet (CDU): 11% (-2) !
    If Laschet tries to do a deal with the Greens and FDP, Soder could well threaten to take the CSU into opposition given he loathes Laschet who he believes cost him the top job. He would argue the SDP won most seats so has the right to lead the government and without CSU support a Union, Green, FDP government would not have a majority.

    The likeliest outcome however remains a Scholz led government with the Greens and FDP
    I disagree on the basis the right wing libertarians the FDP neither have enough in common with greens and SPD, also know junior partner in coalition with them weakens their voice and electoral chances. The most likeliest outcome is CSU, FDP green or CSU SPD.

    Watch as FDP kill your most likely outcome stone dead.
    Yes, I have no idea how Linder will behave this time considering he junked negotiations last time. On the other hand I think a lot of the FDP's younger supporters might be more positive about an Ampel coalition.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 15,403
    Alistair said:

    Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    glw said:

    I had a phone call from my bank recently. Would I answer some questions about recent changes to my current account terms and conditions? Sure, okay. First I have to ask you some security questions. Er, how can I be sure you're really from the bank?

    The system is absurd.

    Banks and credit card companies have some of the worst security going. UK banks have recently enabled SMS for authenticating card not present transactions, even though using SMS for such purposes is something standards organisations have deprecated for years now. Bank are effectively subcontracing the security of your bank accounts to your mobile carrier, who in turn have farmed out the leg work to someone in a call centre overseas or a teenager in a store doing a Saturday job. You would be hard pressed to come up with something worse.

    No bank to the best of my knowledge offers security as good as you can get from a Google, Microsoft, or Apple account, and in some cases you can get their best security options for free.
    Ten years ago the buzz was that passwords would be quickly replaced by biometrics such as eye scans or fingerprints. Why arent we using those more? (Genuine question, not saying we should or shouldn't).
    My bank app uses face recognition.
    mine uses fingerprints. but in both cases they are just relying on the phone, presumably? Chinese phone in my case, I wrongly thought it was from taiwan, and I'd have thought twice if i knew it was PRC.

    It also uses voice recognition on the phone.
    I'd have thought the OS was more important... presumably Android, so Google developed and controlled in the US right?
    No, not unless you wipe the phone completely and install a clean version. Even then it is relatively easy to have the hardware programmed to compromise the OS. Lenovo did it with their laptops.

    I'd never use biometrics for an app as they can't be changed if compromised. PINs and the like (painful though they might be) can.
    The joys of Android, I guess. Although I can't see why Google couldn't close those OS shortcomings.
    Because they let each manufacturer roll their own version of Android - including the Chinese ones.

    I’d be quite wary of using any Chinese brand Android phone for banking stuff, to be honest.
    I would unequivocally not use a Chinese phone.
    Not least because the keyboard would be hard work.
    Oh I see.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,142
    Alistair said:

    Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    glw said:

    I had a phone call from my bank recently. Would I answer some questions about recent changes to my current account terms and conditions? Sure, okay. First I have to ask you some security questions. Er, how can I be sure you're really from the bank?

    The system is absurd.

    Banks and credit card companies have some of the worst security going. UK banks have recently enabled SMS for authenticating card not present transactions, even though using SMS for such purposes is something standards organisations have deprecated for years now. Bank are effectively subcontracing the security of your bank accounts to your mobile carrier, who in turn have farmed out the leg work to someone in a call centre overseas or a teenager in a store doing a Saturday job. You would be hard pressed to come up with something worse.

    No bank to the best of my knowledge offers security as good as you can get from a Google, Microsoft, or Apple account, and in some cases you can get their best security options for free.
    Ten years ago the buzz was that passwords would be quickly replaced by biometrics such as eye scans or fingerprints. Why arent we using those more? (Genuine question, not saying we should or shouldn't).
    My bank app uses face recognition.
    mine uses fingerprints. but in both cases they are just relying on the phone, presumably? Chinese phone in my case, I wrongly thought it was from taiwan, and I'd have thought twice if i knew it was PRC.

    It also uses voice recognition on the phone.
    I'd have thought the OS was more important... presumably Android, so Google developed and controlled in the US right?
    No, not unless you wipe the phone completely and install a clean version. Even then it is relatively easy to have the hardware programmed to compromise the OS. Lenovo did it with their laptops.

    I'd never use biometrics for an app as they can't be changed if compromised. PINs and the like (painful though they might be) can.
    The joys of Android, I guess. Although I can't see why Google couldn't close those OS shortcomings.
    Because they let each manufacturer roll their own version of Android - including the Chinese ones.

    I’d be quite wary of using any Chinese brand Android phone for banking stuff, to be honest.
    I would unequivocally not use a Chinese phone.
    What do you think might happen if you do?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 13,782
    MaxPB said:

    Company vaccine wall going up on the October 11th. All employees who wish to attend social events or any in-person office days will have to upload proof of vaccination or their entry key card will be deactivated. Only medical exemptions are allowed but they come "at their own risk" because all social distancing is officially junked from the 11th onwards.

    Tbh, this feels aimed at our US offices rather than London but it's being applied globally with Japan getting it in December when everyone's been given an opportunity to have the vaccine.

    Will paper certificates be accepted?
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 15,403
    edited September 28
    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    On topic, if Trump wants the nomination, he will get it and it is increasingly clear he does. Also, he is playing a smart game by keeping relatively quiet. That might not be a popular idea on here given the consensus that Trump is a stupid buffoon but he is a lot smarter than many give him credit for.

    There was also a good piece by Conrad Black today, which won’t please many on here but the link is below. With regards to his comments on the 2020 election, they will make many here choke but, quite frankly, that’s not important - this is what the GOP is thinking about what happened in November:

    https://amgreatness.com/2021/09/27/democrats-repeat-the-mistakes-of-2016/

    Final point. I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means ie his election will be illegitimate. Ironically, there is a fair bit of overlap between those who are the strongest in pushing this view and those who are most shrill about saying how the GOP’s conduct remains the biggest threat to American democracy. It doesn’t seem to occur to many on here that Trump may win because people will be sick of Biden’s incompetence but it is worrying that we are starting to see the building blocks being out in place to claim any Trump 2024 win is, by default, illegitimate.

    "I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means"

    Really?

    Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't seen a single comment along those lines.

    Presumably you have plenty of examples.
    I can see how it might be interpreted that way and some my comments might be close to saying that. But it is spectacularly missing the point.

    The election of a President who sets out to win by cheating is a threat to democracy whether they win by cheating or if they would have won anyway without cheating. The Trump Republicans are setting out to cheat.
    I don't follow US politics closely. How exactly are they going to cheat?
    The Republicans have been cheating for years. Gerrymandering did not start with Trump, and nor did vote suppression.
    The Democrats have been enthusiastic gerrymanderers for years.

    That being said, it is great that a number of States have implemented measures to limit the ability of lawmakers to set boundaries that benefit themselves. It is notable (ah hem, @MrEd) that Democratic states have been better* at putting in place independent bodies. It's one of the reasons why the Dems need to win the House by a surprisingly large percentage points margin to hold it.

    * Not universally better; Democratic Maryland has historically been a pretty terrible gerrymanderer
    There is some serendipity there. Maryland itself looks the most like a gerrymandered state.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 26,159

    IshmaelZ said:

    glw said:

    I had a phone call from my bank recently. Would I answer some questions about recent changes to my current account terms and conditions? Sure, okay. First I have to ask you some security questions. Er, how can I be sure you're really from the bank?

    The system is absurd.

    Banks and credit card companies have some of the worst security going. UK banks have recently enabled SMS for authenticating card not present transactions, even though using SMS for such purposes is something standards organisations have deprecated for years now. Bank are effectively subcontracing the security of your bank accounts to your mobile carrier, who in turn have farmed out the leg work to someone in a call centre overseas or a teenager in a store doing a Saturday job. You would be hard pressed to come up with something worse.

    No bank to the best of my knowledge offers security as good as you can get from a Google, Microsoft, or Apple account, and in some cases you can get their best security options for free.
    Ten years ago the buzz was that passwords would be quickly replaced by biometrics such as eye scans or fingerprints. Why arent we using those more? (Genuine question, not saying we should or shouldn't).
    My bank app uses face recognition.
    mine uses fingerprints. but in both cases they are just relying on the phone, presumably? Chinese phone in my case, I wrongly thought it was from taiwan, and I'd have thought twice if i knew it was PRC.

    It also uses voice recognition on the phone.
    I'd have thought the OS was more important... presumably Android, so Google developed and controlled in the US right?
    No, not unless you wipe the phone completely and install a clean version. Even then it is relatively easy to have the hardware programmed to compromise the OS. Lenovo did it with their laptops.

    I'd never use biometrics for an app as they can't be changed if compromised. PINs and the like (painful though they might be) can.
    The joys of Android, I guess. Although I can't see why Google couldn't close those OS shortcomings.
    If you make the hardware, you have full control of the device. I think it would be very difficult for Google to stop added extras. The same goes for Microsoft and all Windows devices.
    There is always the possibility of chip-level malware, baked into the silicon. Very difficult to detect until it is triggered. Or other approaches, like the following:
    https://www.wired.com/story/plant-spy-chips-hardware-supermicro-cheap-proof-of-concept/
  • RobDRobD Posts: 55,634
    Andy_JS said:

    MaxPB said:

    Company vaccine wall going up on the October 11th. All employees who wish to attend social events or any in-person office days will have to upload proof of vaccination or their entry key card will be deactivated. Only medical exemptions are allowed but they come "at their own risk" because all social distancing is officially junked from the 11th onwards.

    Tbh, this feels aimed at our US offices rather than London but it's being applied globally with Japan getting it in December when everyone's been given an opportunity to have the vaccine.

    Will paper certificates be accepted?
    I mean you could print off the PDF and hand it to them, but it would surely just be easier to send the PDF?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 31,743
    Andy_JS said:

    MaxPB said:

    Company vaccine wall going up on the October 11th. All employees who wish to attend social events or any in-person office days will have to upload proof of vaccination or their entry key card will be deactivated. Only medical exemptions are allowed but they come "at their own risk" because all social distancing is officially junked from the 11th onwards.

    Tbh, this feels aimed at our US offices rather than London but it's being applied globally with Japan getting it in December when everyone's been given an opportunity to have the vaccine.

    Will paper certificates be accepted?
    Necessarily paperless.
  • Our local BP is now showing as Not Busy on Google. Looks like they ran out of fuel this afternoon as forecast.

    Tesco in Ilford North shown as "open", along with Goodmayes and Barking, but not Beckton (only "opens 6am").
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,577
    Farooq said:

    Alistair said:

    Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    glw said:

    I had a phone call from my bank recently. Would I answer some questions about recent changes to my current account terms and conditions? Sure, okay. First I have to ask you some security questions. Er, how can I be sure you're really from the bank?

    The system is absurd.

    Banks and credit card companies have some of the worst security going. UK banks have recently enabled SMS for authenticating card not present transactions, even though using SMS for such purposes is something standards organisations have deprecated for years now. Bank are effectively subcontracing the security of your bank accounts to your mobile carrier, who in turn have farmed out the leg work to someone in a call centre overseas or a teenager in a store doing a Saturday job. You would be hard pressed to come up with something worse.

    No bank to the best of my knowledge offers security as good as you can get from a Google, Microsoft, or Apple account, and in some cases you can get their best security options for free.
    Ten years ago the buzz was that passwords would be quickly replaced by biometrics such as eye scans or fingerprints. Why arent we using those more? (Genuine question, not saying we should or shouldn't).
    My bank app uses face recognition.
    mine uses fingerprints. but in both cases they are just relying on the phone, presumably? Chinese phone in my case, I wrongly thought it was from taiwan, and I'd have thought twice if i knew it was PRC.

    It also uses voice recognition on the phone.
    I'd have thought the OS was more important... presumably Android, so Google developed and controlled in the US right?
    No, not unless you wipe the phone completely and install a clean version. Even then it is relatively easy to have the hardware programmed to compromise the OS. Lenovo did it with their laptops.

    I'd never use biometrics for an app as they can't be changed if compromised. PINs and the like (painful though they might be) can.
    The joys of Android, I guess. Although I can't see why Google couldn't close those OS shortcomings.
    Because they let each manufacturer roll their own version of Android - including the Chinese ones.

    I’d be quite wary of using any Chinese brand Android phone for banking stuff, to be honest.
    I would unequivocally not use a Chinese phone.
    What do you think might happen if you do?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ecek8UDqh8&ab_channel=NoUseForAName-Topic

    Can't be too careful.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861

    Evening all. As someone some of us remember used to say.

    Topped up with petrol this evening prior to a long drive Thursday.
    No queue, no limit of what I could buy.

    What a mess the USA is in. I suspect Trump won't be able to run again, either as a result of health problems, or legal ones

    Come to that, what a mess UK is in.

    Of the three petrol stations within a few miles of me, two were out of fuel today.

    I did a 10-mile run in Peterborough today, whilst Mrs J's car was having its service and MOT.
    A few random thoughts:
    *) A petrol station I passed had all fuel and no queues. £30 limit on transactions.
    *) Peterborough isn't the prettiest places, but I managed to run three miles south to the centre on good roadside cycle paths, with no on-level road crossings. Impressive.
    *) Six or seven men drinking from cans of lager in various places. All alone. Quite a sad sight in the early afternoon.
    *) On the way back, I ran through an underpass where three youths on bikes with hoods up were smoking something a little heavy on the nose. A young woman cycled past me, saw the youths, stopped, turned around, and headed back past me.

    The latter was particularly poignant. I have little fear in running or walking anywhere - I feel as though I face more danger from traffic than I do people. Yet I know female friends who are fearful of being out and about alone. It's easy for me, as a man, to forget that ...
    There was a good thread on this on Twitter. Men just don't realise how scary it is for women to run or jog or walk alone at night, even in fairly safe neighbourhoods.

    I confess I seldom consider it. I would walk anywhere in London alone, at any time. Sure there are sketchier places where I would be watchful, and cross the road maybe, and certainly not get a flashy iPhone out to call and browse, but yeah I would walk anywhere, at any time, in London, without too much worry

    For some women they just won't go out alone after dark. That's it

  • https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"
  • Our local BP is now showing as Not Busy on Google. Looks like they ran out of fuel this afternoon as forecast.

    Tesco in Ilford North shown as "open", along with Goodmayes and Barking, but not Beckton (only "opens 6am").
    I think the idea is that a garage shown as "busy" is serving petrol (and is busy because of the queue to fill up) whereas one that is "open" might just be selling sausage rolls and Yorkie bars.
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362

    gealbhan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Jeremy Cliffe
    @JeremyCliffe
    1h
    As a rule of thumb, you can usually learn something about what is really going on in German politics by watching where Markus Söder's tactical sensors are leading him. And he seems to think that Armin Laschet is toast.

    https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1442851399344271361?s=20

    If Union get right into ein Aderlass is that the prospect of any sort of coalition oot the window, or would getting rid of Laschet improve their chances?

    If Laschet somehow cobbles together a coalition of the losers to become the next chancellor, a chance the CSU might start to lose Bavaria tbh.

    KANZLERFRAGE | Umfrage zur Kanzlerpräferenz Forsa/RTL/n-tv

    Scholz (SPD): 56% (+28)
    Laschet (CDU): 11% (-2) !
    If Laschet tries to do a deal with the Greens and FDP, Soder could well threaten to take the CSU into opposition given he loathes Laschet who he believes cost him the top job. He would argue the SDP won most seats so has the right to lead the government and without CSU support a Union, Green, FDP government would not have a majority.

    The likeliest outcome however remains a Scholz led government with the Greens and FDP
    I disagree on the basis the right wing libertarians the FDP neither have enough in common with greens and SPD, also know junior partner in coalition with them weakens their voice and electoral chances. The most likeliest outcome is CSU, FDP green or CSU SPD.

    Watch as FDP kill your most likely outcome stone dead.
    Yes, I have no idea how Linder will behave this time considering he junked negotiations last time. On the other hand I think a lot of the FDP's younger supporters might be more positive about an Ampel coalition.
    I’ll take that as a yes.

    Would you describe FDP as a sort of pro business centrist party, straggling ground between CDU and SPD, or right of centre, the difference between CDU and FDP on right being the historically Christian and Conservative basis of the CDU to the libertarian mindset of the FDP? The CDU up for legalising cannabis? I know Lindner stated the only 1 thing his party and greens could ever agree on would be legalising cannabis, so on that basis who actually votes FDP and why? Is it a comfortable home for someone like PBs great Libertarian Economist Philip Thompson?
  • Our local BP is now showing as Not Busy on Google. Looks like they ran out of fuel this afternoon as forecast.

    Tesco in Ilford North shown as "open", along with Goodmayes and Barking, but not Beckton (only "opens 6am").
    I think the idea is that a garage shown as "busy" is serving petrol (and is busy because of the queue to fill up) whereas one that is "open" might just be selling sausage rolls and Yorkie bars.
    Sorry, should have mentioned that was Tesco's own website.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    Seems accurate to me: if Corbyn had left in the Blair years then he would not have become leader.

    So they should be thanking Mandelson or Prescott or whoever it was that talked Tony out of kicking them out in 1996.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,505

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461

    Our local BP is now showing as Not Busy on Google. Looks like they ran out of fuel this afternoon as forecast.

    Our mobile hairdresser came this afternoon and was fretting that she would struggle to keep her business on the road as it were if these queues get much longer.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 3,022
    edited September 28

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    All true of course, but only partial. Don't forget:

    2017 was the most surreally incompetent Conservative campaign ever

    2019 was perhaps the best Conservative campaign ever

    2023/4 ?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    Seems accurate to me: if Corbyn had left in the Blair years then he would not have become leader.

    So they should be thanking Mandelson or Prescott or whoever it was that talked Tony out of kicking them out in 1996.
    From the same thread


    "Someone is now shouting ‘fuck Starmer.’ Which is nice."

    "They’re all here, all the big lads. Gardiner, Burgon, McDonnell, Long-Bailey, Magic Grandpa himself. And the crowd are absolutely loving it. That they are, as a matter of fact, the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled, just doesn’t bother them at all."

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442916251538386945?s=20
  • Sandpit said:

    IshmaelZ said:

    glw said:

    I had a phone call from my bank recently. Would I answer some questions about recent changes to my current account terms and conditions? Sure, okay. First I have to ask you some security questions. Er, how can I be sure you're really from the bank?

    The system is absurd.

    Banks and credit card companies have some of the worst security going. UK banks have recently enabled SMS for authenticating card not present transactions, even though using SMS for such purposes is something standards organisations have deprecated for years now. Bank are effectively subcontracing the security of your bank accounts to your mobile carrier, who in turn have farmed out the leg work to someone in a call centre overseas or a teenager in a store doing a Saturday job. You would be hard pressed to come up with something worse.

    No bank to the best of my knowledge offers security as good as you can get from a Google, Microsoft, or Apple account, and in some cases you can get their best security options for free.
    Ten years ago the buzz was that passwords would be quickly replaced by biometrics such as eye scans or fingerprints. Why arent we using those more? (Genuine question, not saying we should or shouldn't).
    My bank app uses face recognition.
    mine uses fingerprints. but in both cases they are just relying on the phone, presumably? Chinese phone in my case, I wrongly thought it was from taiwan, and I'd have thought twice if i knew it was PRC.

    It also uses voice recognition on the phone.
    I'd have thought the OS was more important... presumably Android, so Google developed and controlled in the US right?
    No, not unless you wipe the phone completely and install a clean version. Even then it is relatively easy to have the hardware programmed to compromise the OS. Lenovo did it with their laptops.

    I'd never use biometrics for an app as they can't be changed if compromised. PINs and the like (painful though they might be) can.
    The joys of Android, I guess. Although I can't see why Google couldn't close those OS shortcomings.
    Because they let each manufacturer roll their own version of Android - including the Chinese ones.

    I’d be quite wary of using any Chinese brand Android phone for banking stuff, to be honest.
    Really? I use my banking app on my Huawei phone all the time. As far as I know it hasn't started diverting money out of my current account to fund the Chinese Communist Party or anything.
    As I understand it the problem the West has with Huawei isn't so much that they let the Chinese intelligence services spy on you, but that they might not let the Western intelligence services spy on you. I think it's generally best to assume that anyone who really wanted to can spy on what you do online and behave accordingly. Anyway, it's a good phone at a decent price and I've had no problems with it.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461
    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.
  • gealbhangealbhan Posts: 2,362

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    2017 A lot of people thought voting Labour would stop BREXIT (that ironically Corbyn’s antics in 2016 enabled) and Labour were so far behind there was no fear of PM Corbyn.

    2019. Another BREXIT election, Burgon said as much today.

    Critiquing Starmer for not being lefty enough is sooooo last week. A long week of having Abbot, Corbyn, Burgon and Mcdonnell in front cameras and microphones and in media articles, pushing the ludicrous “party more divided now than when we were in charge message” has simply reminded everybody why having Starmer and Reeves in charge instead is such a good idea 😃

    You need to appreciate the damage the left have inflicted on themselves this week in the eyes of party members, what should have come across as spontaneous holding leadership toes to the coals on touchstone issues, came across as so pre planned, scripted, student politics stuff.

    It’s not only Franco, who can smell a rat, Big Knowls
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461
    Leon said:

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    Seems accurate to me: if Corbyn had left in the Blair years then he would not have become leader.

    So they should be thanking Mandelson or Prescott or whoever it was that talked Tony out of kicking them out in 1996.
    From the same thread


    "Someone is now shouting ‘fuck Starmer.’ Which is nice."

    "They’re all here, all the big lads. Gardiner, Burgon, McDonnell, Long-Bailey, Magic Grandpa himself. And the crowd are absolutely loving it. That they are, as a matter of fact, the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled, just doesn’t bother them at all."

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442916251538386945?s=20
    As I say, excessive comment.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 55,634

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    Was there a Cabinet meeting I missed or something?
  • https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    And Labour still won fewer seats in 2017 than Tony Blair's worst general election result.

    Can you tell us in terms of Con to Lab swing where does 2017 rank since the war?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    "Ever assembled in British history" might be fair. Corbyn's Labour was remarkabe

    And, if you're judging by sheer results, Hitler did win his election, in the end
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 9,577
    dixiedean said:

    glw said:

    I had a phone call from my bank recently. Would I answer some questions about recent changes to my current account terms and conditions? Sure, okay. First I have to ask you some security questions. Er, how can I be sure you're really from the bank?

    The system is absurd.

    Banks and credit card companies have some of the worst security going. UK banks have recently enabled SMS for authenticating card not present transactions, even though using SMS for such purposes is something standards organisations have deprecated for years now. Bank are effectively subcontracing the security of your bank accounts to your mobile carrier, who in turn have farmed out the leg work to someone in a call centre overseas or a teenager in a store doing a Saturday job. You would be hard pressed to come up with something worse.

    No bank to the best of my knowledge offers security as good as you can get from a Google, Microsoft, or Apple account, and in some cases you can get their best security options for free.
    Ten years ago the buzz was that passwords would be quickly replaced by biometrics such as eye scans or fingerprints. Why arent we using those more? (Genuine question, not saying we should or shouldn't).
    Fingerprints are hugely unreliable. They aren't as unique as you might think. And a surprising amount don't have them. Friend at college didn't. Plus they can be damaged by scarring, blistering, etc.
    There's a cancer drug called capecitabine which has the side effect of making you lose them.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461
    tlg86 said:

    MaxPB said:

    Company vaccine wall going up on the October 11th. All employees who wish to attend social events or any in-person office days will have to upload proof of vaccination or their entry key card will be deactivated. Only medical exemptions are allowed but they come "at their own risk" because all social distancing is officially junked from the 11th onwards.

    Tbh, this feels aimed at our US offices rather than London but it's being applied globally with Japan getting it in December when everyone's been given an opportunity to have the vaccine.

    I wonder what would happen if someone challenged that in our courts?
    Strikes me as totally over the top. I went to a hospital appt last week. No one demanded we have a vax passport to get into the waiting room.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461
    Alistair said:

    The reason Trump had been "quiet" is because he's banned from Twitter and Facebook.

    He still puts out inflammatory rants on his website but no one in the media gives a shit about websites any more so the tv channels no longer breathlessly report all his nonsense.

    I imagine once he is the nominee they will let him back on Twitter and the media circus will resume.

    And so endeth the American republic...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 43,080
    edited September 28
    Fishing said:

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    All true of course, but don't forget:

    2017 was the most surreally incompetent Conservative campaign ever

    2019 was perhaps the best Conservative campaign ever

    2023/4 ?
    2017 was also at the time Labour’s sixth worst defeat since World War Two in terms of seats won - outranked by 1983, 1987, 2015, 2010 and 1959.

    Their much vaunted vote share was wasted piling up huge majorities in safe seats. They made very little actual progress against either the Tories or the SNP where it mattered. Indeed, in large numbers of seats they went backwards, presaging the Johnson landslide two years later.

    It seems many on the left are still traumatised and in denial by just how big a disaster Corbyn was. Which he was. He has a worse electoral record than Neil Kinnock. And at least Kinnock had the excuse that for one of his elections he was up against Thatcher.

    What’s Corbyn’s excuse?

    Good night.
  • glwglw Posts: 7,744

    No, not unless you wipe the phone completely and install a clean version. Even then it is relatively easy to have the hardware programmed to compromise the OS. Lenovo did it with their laptops.

    I'd never use biometrics for an app as they can't be changed if compromised. PINs and the like (painful though they might be) can.

    But biometrics on smartphones work like PINs. The biometric never leaves the device, it simplies allows access to a token that is used for authentication. Google or Apple never see the biometric, on most modern smartphones the OS itself nevers sees the biometric either, it only goes to a trusted execution environment or a secure enclave. You don't send Google or Apple a copy of your fingerprint that permanently compromises your accounts, it's simply a means of allowing the securely registered token when you first add an account to a device to be used. You can wipe and change the biometric as easily as you can change a PIN.
  • https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    SKS wasn't leader at the 2019 GE.

    Jezza was!
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461
    Leon said:

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    "Ever assembled in British history" might be fair. Corbyn's Labour was remarkabe

    And, if you're judging by sheer results, Hitler did win his election, in the end
    Yes, ever in British history probably does work. At least since franchise and democracy. There's probably some gang of Anglo Saxon clerics and warrior kings who took control of Mercia or wherever who were even worse.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 44,461
    RobD said:

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    Was there a Cabinet meeting I missed or something?
    No - Corbyn cult rally. Barry and Diane and the full gang. It was like Fleetwood Mac managed to get everyone back together for the hits.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 2,160
    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Jeremy Cliffe
    @JeremyCliffe
    1h
    As a rule of thumb, you can usually learn something about what is really going on in German politics by watching where Markus Söder's tactical sensors are leading him. And he seems to think that Armin Laschet is toast.

    https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1442851399344271361?s=20

    If Union get right into ein Aderlass is that the prospect of any sort of coalition oot the window, or would getting rid of Laschet improve their chances?

    If Laschet somehow cobbles together a coalition of the losers to become the next chancellor, a chance the CSU might start to lose Bavaria tbh.

    KANZLERFRAGE | Umfrage zur Kanzlerpräferenz Forsa/RTL/n-tv

    Scholz (SPD): 56% (+28)
    Laschet (CDU): 11% (-2) !
    If Laschet tries to do a deal with the Greens and FDP, Soder could well threaten to take the CSU into opposition given he loathes Laschet who he believes cost him the top job. He would argue the SDP won most seats so has the right to lead the government and without CSU support a Union, Green, FDP government would not have a majority.

    The likeliest outcome however remains a Scholz led government with the Greens and FDP
    I disagree on the basis the right wing libertarians the FDP neither have enough in common with greens and SPD, also know junior partner in coalition with them weakens their voice and electoral chances. The most likeliest outcome is CSU, FDP green or CSU SPD.

    Watch as FDP kill your most likely outcome stone dead.
    Yes, I have no idea how Linder will behave this time considering he junked negotiations last time. On the other hand I think a lot of the FDP's younger supporters might be more positive about an Ampel coalition.
    I’ll take that as a yes.

    Would you describe FDP as a sort of pro business centrist party, straggling ground between CDU and SPD, or right of centre, the difference between CDU and FDP on right being the historically Christian and Conservative basis of the CDU to the libertarian mindset of the FDP? The CDU up for legalising cannabis? I know Lindner stated the only 1 thing his party and greens could ever agree on would be legalising cannabis, so on that basis who actually votes FDP and why? Is it a comfortable home for someone like PBs great Libertarian Economist Philip Thompson?
    In my experience the only people I've ever met who vote FDP are rich people who don't want to pay more tax. But I appreciate there must be a handful of others.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 4,477
    Leon said:

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    Seems accurate to me: if Corbyn had left in the Blair years then he would not have become leader.

    So they should be thanking Mandelson or Prescott or whoever it was that talked Tony out of kicking them out in 1996.
    From the same thread


    "Someone is now shouting ‘fuck Starmer.’ Which is nice."

    "They’re all here, all the big lads. Gardiner, Burgon, McDonnell, Long-Bailey, Magic Grandpa himself. And the crowd are absolutely loving it. That they are, as a matter of fact, the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled, just doesn’t bother them at all."

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442916251538386945?s=20
    Have they seen the current cabinet?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    ydoethur said:

    Fishing said:

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    All true of course, but don't forget:

    2017 was the most surreally incompetent Conservative campaign ever

    2019 was perhaps the best Conservative campaign ever

    2023/4 ?
    2017 was also at the time Labour’s sixth worst defeat since World War Two in terms of seats won - outranked by 1983, 1987, 2015, 2010 and 1959.

    Their much vaunted vote share was wasted piling up huge majorities in safe seats. They made very little actual progress against either the Tories or the SNP where it mattered. Indeed, in large numbers of seats they went backwards, presaging the Johnson landslide two years later.

    It seems many on the left are still traumatised and in denial by just how big a disaster Corbyn was. Which he was. He has a worse electoral record than Neil Kinnock. And at least Kinnock had the excuse that for one of his elections he was up against Thatcher.

    What’s Corbyn’s excuse?

    Good night.
    Corbyn also benefited from millions of Remoaners pinching noses and voting for him, in the vague hope he might reverse the referendum, or at least rerun it

    Without that I am sure his insane party would have crashed to a much nastier defeat

    In the end Corbyn's decent performance meant the end of TMay, which meant Boris as PM, and therefore a much harder Brexit - virtually a No Deal Brexit - than anyone wanted

    The ironies and paradoxes of British politics from, say, 2012-2022 will be puzzling historians for decades hence
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 16,837
    Nobody at my firm is arsed if you’re vaccinated or not
  • Mo and Mr Jones.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 10,741
    edited September 28
    OK. What a day.

    1 - Why were our Scottish Members talking about flatworm and penis fences?

    Who's selling dodgy penises?

    2 - Having looked up one, the first answer is something called "Pseudobiceros hancockanus".

    Now, "Hancock, Anus" may explain a lot for some people, but what is a Biceros? And a Pseudo-biceros?

    3 - Sir Keith (Pseudo Leader Labourus?) seems to be trolling his extremists.

    4 - Shopping.

    The Port of Lancaster Smokehouse seems to have an excellent availability of Smoked Mallards for Christmas, and Haggises, and Kippers. Ordered. Is 3 Mallards hoarding? Surprisingly inexpensive Mallards - does anyone have any missing? The whole thing is cheaper than a couple of Mallard breast fillets from Waitrose.

    5 - Where's Pseudo Scottus?

    The last lot of BS having evaporated, we now need another item on the BS conveyor. What will it be?

    6 - Listened to a bit of the Shadow Chancellor.

    There seem to be a couple of hundred billion of uncosted promises, and about 1-5% of that in new taxes. Including Pseudo £283m from not buying a yacht that may not even exist yet.

    Hmmm. Eight 'o' Clock an time for tea.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861

    Leon said:

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    "Ever assembled in British history" might be fair. Corbyn's Labour was remarkabe

    And, if you're judging by sheer results, Hitler did win his election, in the end
    Yes, ever in British history probably does work. At least since franchise and democracy. There's probably some gang of Anglo Saxon clerics and warrior kings who took control of Mercia or wherever who were even worse.
    Agreed.

    I cannot think of a worse leadership/front bench combination, presented to the British people by Her Majesty's Opposition or Govt, than that of Corbyn & Labour in 2017-19. I mean, FFS. just the memory of Diane Abbott unable to say whether we were having 10,000 new policeman on £100,000 a week, or ten million on a fiver. Excruciatingly poor. Like schoolkids on nitrous oxide

    Michael Foot got a lot of nasty criticism but he was at least an intelligent, thoughtful man (albeit misguided, to my mind), and he had some heavyweight people in his Shadow Cabinet. Major's Tories in 1997 were a pathetic spectacle, but that was due to exhaustion, defeatism, and moral vacuity, rather than a total lack of brains and talent

    So Corbyn is the worst- but that is just my living memory. Maybe British democracy can furnish an even more lamentable example from the 1930s or 1880 or whatever. But I'd be surprised
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,580
    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    On topic, if Trump wants the nomination, he will get it and it is increasingly clear he does. Also, he is playing a smart game by keeping relatively quiet. That might not be a popular idea on here given the consensus that Trump is a stupid buffoon but he is a lot smarter than many give him credit for.

    There was also a good piece by Conrad Black today, which won’t please many on here but the link is below. With regards to his comments on the 2020 election, they will make many here choke but, quite frankly, that’s not important - this is what the GOP is thinking about what happened in November:

    https://amgreatness.com/2021/09/27/democrats-repeat-the-mistakes-of-2016/

    Final point. I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means ie his election will be illegitimate. Ironically, there is a fair bit of overlap between those who are the strongest in pushing this view and those who are most shrill about saying how the GOP’s conduct remains the biggest threat to American democracy. It doesn’t seem to occur to many on here that Trump may win because people will be sick of Biden’s incompetence but it is worrying that we are starting to see the building blocks being out in place to claim any Trump 2024 win is, by default, illegitimate.

    "I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means"

    Really?

    Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't seen a single comment along those lines.

    Presumably you have plenty of examples.
    I can see how it might be interpreted that way and some my comments might be close to saying that. But it is spectacularly missing the point.

    The election of a President who sets out to win by cheating is a threat to democracy whether they win by cheating or if they would have won anyway without cheating. The Trump Republicans are setting out to cheat.
    I don't follow US politics closely. How exactly are they going to cheat?
    The Republicans have been cheating for years. Gerrymandering did not start with Trump, and nor did vote suppression.
    The Democrats have been enthusiastic gerrymanderers for years.

    That being said, it is great that a number of States have implemented measures to limit the ability of lawmakers to set boundaries that benefit themselves. It is notable (ah hem, @MrEd) that Democratic states have been better* at putting in place independent bodies. It's one of the reasons why the Dems need to win the House by a surprisingly large percentage points margin to hold it.

    * Not universally better; Democratic Maryland has historically been a pretty terrible gerrymanderer
    Here in New York we have a constitutional amendment proposition to vote on in November which would make it easier for the Democrats to gerrymander. They can actually do it right now as they have the trifecta (state house, senate and governor) but need a 2/3 supermajority in both houses, which they have but barely. The proposition would reduce the threshold for overriding the current independent redistricting commission to 60% of the two houses.

    I will probably vote for it.
  • kamskikamski Posts: 2,160
    kamski said:

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Jeremy Cliffe
    @JeremyCliffe
    1h
    As a rule of thumb, you can usually learn something about what is really going on in German politics by watching where Markus Söder's tactical sensors are leading him. And he seems to think that Armin Laschet is toast.

    https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1442851399344271361?s=20

    If Union get right into ein Aderlass is that the prospect of any sort of coalition oot the window, or would getting rid of Laschet improve their chances?

    If Laschet somehow cobbles together a coalition of the losers to become the next chancellor, a chance the CSU might start to lose Bavaria tbh.

    KANZLERFRAGE | Umfrage zur Kanzlerpräferenz Forsa/RTL/n-tv

    Scholz (SPD): 56% (+28)
    Laschet (CDU): 11% (-2) !
    If Laschet tries to do a deal with the Greens and FDP, Soder could well threaten to take the CSU into opposition given he loathes Laschet who he believes cost him the top job. He would argue the SDP won most seats so has the right to lead the government and without CSU support a Union, Green, FDP government would not have a majority.

    The likeliest outcome however remains a Scholz led government with the Greens and FDP
    I disagree on the basis the right wing libertarians the FDP neither have enough in common with greens and SPD, also know junior partner in coalition with them weakens their voice and electoral chances. The most likeliest outcome is CSU, FDP green or CSU SPD.

    Watch as FDP kill your most likely outcome stone dead.
    Yes, I have no idea how Linder will behave this time considering he junked negotiations last time. On the other hand I think a lot of the FDP's younger supporters might be more positive about an Ampel coalition.
    I’ll take that as a yes.

    Would you describe FDP as a sort of pro business centrist party, straggling ground between CDU and SPD, or right of centre, the difference between CDU and FDP on right being the historically Christian and Conservative basis of the CDU to the libertarian mindset of the FDP? The CDU up for legalising cannabis? I know Lindner stated the only 1 thing his party and greens could ever agree on would be legalising cannabis, so on that basis who actually votes FDP and why? Is it a comfortable home for someone like PBs great Libertarian Economist Philip Thompson?
    In my experience the only people I've ever met who vote FDP are rich people who don't want to pay more tax. But I appreciate there must be a handful of others.
    Also it would probably be electoral poison for the Greens to support a CDU led coalition this time around.
    I expect Lindner to be offered the Finance Ministry, the SPD to drop some of their tax-raising plans, and an ugly SPD-Greens-FDP coalition.
    This would quite suit the CDU in a way, who could ditch Laschet and enjoy being the main party of opposition to a government that won't be able to have a clear direction (because of the bloody FDP) facing difficult challenges.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 55,634
    kamski said:

    kamski said:

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    HYUFD said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Jeremy Cliffe
    @JeremyCliffe
    1h
    As a rule of thumb, you can usually learn something about what is really going on in German politics by watching where Markus Söder's tactical sensors are leading him. And he seems to think that Armin Laschet is toast.

    https://twitter.com/JeremyCliffe/status/1442851399344271361?s=20

    If Union get right into ein Aderlass is that the prospect of any sort of coalition oot the window, or would getting rid of Laschet improve their chances?

    If Laschet somehow cobbles together a coalition of the losers to become the next chancellor, a chance the CSU might start to lose Bavaria tbh.

    KANZLERFRAGE | Umfrage zur Kanzlerpräferenz Forsa/RTL/n-tv

    Scholz (SPD): 56% (+28)
    Laschet (CDU): 11% (-2) !
    If Laschet tries to do a deal with the Greens and FDP, Soder could well threaten to take the CSU into opposition given he loathes Laschet who he believes cost him the top job. He would argue the SDP won most seats so has the right to lead the government and without CSU support a Union, Green, FDP government would not have a majority.

    The likeliest outcome however remains a Scholz led government with the Greens and FDP
    I disagree on the basis the right wing libertarians the FDP neither have enough in common with greens and SPD, also know junior partner in coalition with them weakens their voice and electoral chances. The most likeliest outcome is CSU, FDP green or CSU SPD.

    Watch as FDP kill your most likely outcome stone dead.
    Yes, I have no idea how Linder will behave this time considering he junked negotiations last time. On the other hand I think a lot of the FDP's younger supporters might be more positive about an Ampel coalition.
    I’ll take that as a yes.

    Would you describe FDP as a sort of pro business centrist party, straggling ground between CDU and SPD, or right of centre, the difference between CDU and FDP on right being the historically Christian and Conservative basis of the CDU to the libertarian mindset of the FDP? The CDU up for legalising cannabis? I know Lindner stated the only 1 thing his party and greens could ever agree on would be legalising cannabis, so on that basis who actually votes FDP and why? Is it a comfortable home for someone like PBs great Libertarian Economist Philip Thompson?
    In my experience the only people I've ever met who vote FDP are rich people who don't want to pay more tax. But I appreciate there must be a handful of others.
    Also it would probably be electoral poison for the Greens to support a CDU led coalition this time around.
    I expect Lindner to be offered the Finance Ministry, the SPD to drop some of their tax-raising plans, and an ugly SPD-Greens-FDP coalition.
    This would quite suit the CDU in a way, who could ditch Laschet and enjoy being the main party of opposition to a government that won't be able to have a clear direction (because of the bloody FDP) facing difficult challenges.
    Are the CDU really gunning for a coalition? It was quite a big loss for them at the election.
  • Leon said:

    Evening all. As someone some of us remember used to say.

    Topped up with petrol this evening prior to a long drive Thursday.
    No queue, no limit of what I could buy.

    What a mess the USA is in. I suspect Trump won't be able to run again, either as a result of health problems, or legal ones

    Come to that, what a mess UK is in.

    Of the three petrol stations within a few miles of me, two were out of fuel today.

    I did a 10-mile run in Peterborough today, whilst Mrs J's car was having its service and MOT.
    A few random thoughts:
    *) A petrol station I passed had all fuel and no queues. £30 limit on transactions.
    *) Peterborough isn't the prettiest places, but I managed to run three miles south to the centre on good roadside cycle paths, with no on-level road crossings. Impressive.
    *) Six or seven men drinking from cans of lager in various places. All alone. Quite a sad sight in the early afternoon.
    *) On the way back, I ran through an underpass where three youths on bikes with hoods up were smoking something a little heavy on the nose. A young woman cycled past me, saw the youths, stopped, turned around, and headed back past me.

    The latter was particularly poignant. I have little fear in running or walking anywhere - I feel as though I face more danger from traffic than I do people. Yet I know female friends who are fearful of being out and about alone. It's easy for me, as a man, to forget that ...
    There was a good thread on this on Twitter. Men just don't realise how scary it is for women to run or jog or walk alone at night, even in fairly safe neighbourhoods.

    I confess I seldom consider it. I would walk anywhere in London alone, at any time. Sure there are sketchier places where I would be watchful, and cross the road maybe, and certainly not get a flashy iPhone out to call and browse, but yeah I would walk anywhere, at any time, in London, without too much worry

    For some women they just won't go out alone after dark. That's it

    The people who get angry about what to call people with or without penises / vaginas or who can use which public convenience would be better getting exercised about this inequality.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 10,741

    Water-gate (🤔) update...

    Mrs P. (no pun intended) spotted that as we have no water supply and only three toilets, we are only three flushes from disaster.

    She has therefore decreed flushing is only allowed after a number 2.

    Truly, the end of days 😬

    It will be an issue for many were water supplies to become less reliable. We are mainly on direct mains pressure and gas combi now. All I have are loo flushes, the current Quooker full, and water butts which I would not use even if boiled.)

    (Aside to the other poster: how does a pigeon get into a cold water tank - is it not covered?)
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    "Ever assembled in British history" might be fair. Corbyn's Labour was remarkabe

    And, if you're judging by sheer results, Hitler did win his election, in the end
    Yes, ever in British history probably does work. At least since franchise and democracy. There's probably some gang of Anglo Saxon clerics and warrior kings who took control of Mercia or wherever who were even worse.
    Agreed.

    I cannot think of a worse leadership/front bench combination, presented to the British people by Her Majesty's Opposition or Govt, than that of Corbyn & Labour in 2017-19. I mean, FFS. just the memory of Diane Abbott unable to say whether we were having 10,000 new policeman on £100,000 a week, or ten million on a fiver. Excruciatingly poor. Like schoolkids on nitrous oxide

    Michael Foot got a lot of nasty criticism but he was at least an intelligent, thoughtful man (albeit misguided, to my mind), and he had some heavyweight people in his Shadow Cabinet. Major's Tories in 1997 were a pathetic spectacle, but that was due to exhaustion, defeatism, and moral vacuity, rather than a total lack of brains and talent

    So Corbyn is the worst- but that is just my living memory. Maybe British democracy can furnish an even more lamentable example from the 1930s or 1880 or whatever. But I'd be surprised
    Well, there was that bloke with the messy hair who hid in a fridge, dodged interviews, and seemed oblivious of the assembled press and television cameras when claiming a hospital visit was not a photo op.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,738
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    "Ever assembled in British history" might be fair. Corbyn's Labour was remarkabe

    And, if you're judging by sheer results, Hitler did win his election, in the end
    Yes, ever in British history probably does work. At least since franchise and democracy. There's probably some gang of Anglo Saxon clerics and warrior kings who took control of Mercia or wherever who were even worse.
    Agreed.

    I cannot think of a worse leadership/front bench combination, presented to the British people by Her Majesty's Opposition or Govt, than that of Corbyn & Labour in 2017-19. I mean, FFS. just the memory of Diane Abbott unable to say whether we were having 10,000 new policeman on £100,000 a week, or ten million on a fiver. Excruciatingly poor. Like schoolkids on nitrous oxide

    Michael Foot got a lot of nasty criticism but he was at least an intelligent, thoughtful man (albeit misguided, to my mind), and he had some heavyweight people in his Shadow Cabinet. Major's Tories in 1997 were a pathetic spectacle, but that was due to exhaustion, defeatism, and moral vacuity, rather than a total lack of brains and talent

    So Corbyn is the worst- but that is just my living memory. Maybe British democracy can furnish an even more lamentable example from the 1930s or 1880 or whatever. But I'd be surprised
    I remember an arch Remainer mate of mine in 2017 who flirted with Labour as a stop brexit vote. But every time he said it over a beer he stopped mid sentence and shivered while saying “Dianne Abbot in charge of MI5”.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 40,188
    Pulpstar said:

    dixiedean said:

    If it isn't Trump.
    Then it will be someone who wins by attacking Trump as a loser, sellout, traitor, and wet liberal, who didn't have the guts to go through with a coup.
    This wouldn’t surprise me at all.

    I've got Noem, Greene or Flynn pencilled in as Trump's running mate.
    IANAE but is the first of these not a very expensive candle?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 5,162

    Sandpit said:

    OT credit card fraud has been overtaken by APP (authorised push payments) for the first time.
    https://www.ukfinance.org.uk/policy-and-guidance/reports-publications/2021-half-year-fraud-report

    APP is where the bad guys trick people into making payments or transfers from their own accounts. West Mercia Police describe how it worked in a recent case.
    https://www.westmercia.police.uk/news/west-mercia/news/2021/september/victim-loses-30k-to-fake-bt-caller-fraud/ (ht el reg)

    Given how much inconvenience the KYC stuff from banks imposes on all of us, how come they never appear to be able to identify the account holder recipients of all these scam transfers?
    @TheScreamingEagles might have a better idea. Aiui, the money will end up abroad, out of our jurisdiction. It is quite possible that intermediate payees are also victims that have been taken over by the fraudsters. And if I can steal your identity, why can't I take over your bank account or even set up a new one in your name under my control? As well as stealing your vote!
    Yes I think the money goes abroad very quickly and through multiple jurisdictions.

    I wonder if it would be worth implementing something like clearing for bank transfers.

    i.e. Unless you specifically opt out of it, any bank transfers made by a consumer the funds are not allowed to leave the country for 3 days, regardless of how many banks the money flows through.

    Could save hundreds of millions per year from getting to criminal gangs.
    Would it be cynical to suggest the banks prefer fraudsters to steal from current accounts (ie our money) rather than from credit cards (ie the banks' money)
    To be cynical, a lot of current security practices make it easier for the fraudsters. Just yesterday I upgraded my phone. To do so, I had to answer some security questions and give part of my password. This is to protect me so that you, for instance, cannot mess with my phone account. Trouble is, it also conditions me to answer unthinkingly anyone else asking similar questions.

    Your phone rings. Hello Mr Victim, I'm calling from your bank/isp/bookmaker. Before we go any further can I just check I'm speaking to the account holder? What is your pet cat's mother's first school? You get the picture. And if you won't fall for it, what about your old Aunt Betty who's in a care home?
    I had a phone call from my bank recently. Would I answer some questions about recent changes to my current account terms and conditions? Sure, okay. First I have to ask you some security questions. Er, how can I be sure you're really from the bank?

    The system is absurd.
    The banks should be fined for that. Disgraceful and stupid.
    Are we sure it wasn't in fact a phishing call?
    They would have had to know about the recent change to my current account that the call was about, which seems very unlikely.

    I had the same situation with Scottish Power, when they were spending months blocking my transfer to a different company. After complaining lots I was referred to an elite team of problem-solvers, who gave me a ring and wanted to ask me security questions. By this point I was so pissed off with the whole thing that I spent a while trying to get them to prove to me who they were, but in the end I acquiesced in the hope that they could fix the issue with their database. Which they couldn't. Was only fixed when I went to the ombudsman.

    They've trained us to give away all our security information if anyone claiming to be from our bank/utility company phones us up and asks for it. We need better means of authentication.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 10,741
    Leon said:

    Evening all. As someone some of us remember used to say.

    Topped up with petrol this evening prior to a long drive Thursday.
    No queue, no limit of what I could buy.

    What a mess the USA is in. I suspect Trump won't be able to run again, either as a result of health problems, or legal ones

    Come to that, what a mess UK is in.

    Of the three petrol stations within a few miles of me, two were out of fuel today.

    I did a 10-mile run in Peterborough today, whilst Mrs J's car was having its service and MOT.
    A few random thoughts:
    *) A petrol station I passed had all fuel and no queues. £30 limit on transactions.
    *) Peterborough isn't the prettiest places, but I managed to run three miles south to the centre on good roadside cycle paths, with no on-level road crossings. Impressive.
    *) Six or seven men drinking from cans of lager in various places. All alone. Quite a sad sight in the early afternoon.
    *) On the way back, I ran through an underpass where three youths on bikes with hoods up were smoking something a little heavy on the nose. A young woman cycled past me, saw the youths, stopped, turned around, and headed back past me.

    The latter was particularly poignant. I have little fear in running or walking anywhere - I feel as though I face more danger from traffic than I do people. Yet I know female friends who are fearful of being out and about alone. It's easy for me, as a man, to forget that ...
    There was a good thread on this on Twitter. Men just don't realise how scary it is for women to run or jog or walk alone at night, even in fairly safe neighbourhoods.

    I confess I seldom consider it. I would walk anywhere in London alone, at any time. Sure there are sketchier places where I would be watchful, and cross the road maybe, and certainly not get a flashy iPhone out to call and browse, but yeah I would walk anywhere, at any time, in London, without too much worry

    For some women they just won't go out alone after dark. That's it

    I was mugged in the evening in Hampstead, near the Royal Free. Druggie with a bloody heavy stick.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Evening all. As someone some of us remember used to say.

    Topped up with petrol this evening prior to a long drive Thursday.
    No queue, no limit of what I could buy.

    What a mess the USA is in. I suspect Trump won't be able to run again, either as a result of health problems, or legal ones

    Come to that, what a mess UK is in.

    Of the three petrol stations within a few miles of me, two were out of fuel today.

    I did a 10-mile run in Peterborough today, whilst Mrs J's car was having its service and MOT.
    A few random thoughts:
    *) A petrol station I passed had all fuel and no queues. £30 limit on transactions.
    *) Peterborough isn't the prettiest places, but I managed to run three miles south to the centre on good roadside cycle paths, with no on-level road crossings. Impressive.
    *) Six or seven men drinking from cans of lager in various places. All alone. Quite a sad sight in the early afternoon.
    *) On the way back, I ran through an underpass where three youths on bikes with hoods up were smoking something a little heavy on the nose. A young woman cycled past me, saw the youths, stopped, turned around, and headed back past me.

    The latter was particularly poignant. I have little fear in running or walking anywhere - I feel as though I face more danger from traffic than I do people. Yet I know female friends who are fearful of being out and about alone. It's easy for me, as a man, to forget that ...
    There was a good thread on this on Twitter. Men just don't realise how scary it is for women to run or jog or walk alone at night, even in fairly safe neighbourhoods.

    I confess I seldom consider it. I would walk anywhere in London alone, at any time. Sure there are sketchier places where I would be watchful, and cross the road maybe, and certainly not get a flashy iPhone out to call and browse, but yeah I would walk anywhere, at any time, in London, without too much worry

    For some women they just won't go out alone after dark. That's it

    I was mugged in the evening in Hampstead, near the Royal Free. Druggie with a bloody heavy stick.
    More of my male friends in London have been mugged than female. But, on reflection, that's probably because my male friends go out all hours to all places, without a thought, and my female friends are WAY more cautious
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,704

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    "Ever assembled in British history" might be fair. Corbyn's Labour was remarkabe

    And, if you're judging by sheer results, Hitler did win his election, in the end
    Yes, ever in British history probably does work. At least since franchise and democracy. There's probably some gang of Anglo Saxon clerics and warrior kings who took control of Mercia or wherever who were even worse.
    Agreed.

    I cannot think of a worse leadership/front bench combination, presented to the British people by Her Majesty's Opposition or Govt, than that of Corbyn & Labour in 2017-19. I mean, FFS. just the memory of Diane Abbott unable to say whether we were having 10,000 new policeman on £100,000 a week, or ten million on a fiver. Excruciatingly poor. Like schoolkids on nitrous oxide

    Michael Foot got a lot of nasty criticism but he was at least an intelligent, thoughtful man (albeit misguided, to my mind), and he had some heavyweight people in his Shadow Cabinet. Major's Tories in 1997 were a pathetic spectacle, but that was due to exhaustion, defeatism, and moral vacuity, rather than a total lack of brains and talent

    So Corbyn is the worst- but that is just my living memory. Maybe British democracy can furnish an even more lamentable example from the 1930s or 1880 or whatever. But I'd be surprised
    Well, there was that bloke with the messy hair who hid in a fridge, dodged interviews, and seemed oblivious of the assembled press and television cameras when claiming a hospital visit was not a photo op.
    That was all funny/frustrating/disgraceful etc delete as appropriate, but there's probably a distinction between awful front bench combinations and leaders who were electorally unsuccessful and those who were successful.
  • https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
  • Leon said:

    Leon said:

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    "Ever assembled in British history" might be fair. Corbyn's Labour was remarkabe

    And, if you're judging by sheer results, Hitler did win his election, in the end
    Yes, ever in British history probably does work. At least since franchise and democracy. There's probably some gang of Anglo Saxon clerics and warrior kings who took control of Mercia or wherever who were even worse.
    Agreed.

    I cannot think of a worse leadership/front bench combination, presented to the British people by Her Majesty's Opposition or Govt, than that of Corbyn & Labour in 2017-19. I mean, FFS. just the memory of Diane Abbott unable to say whether we were having 10,000 new policeman on £100,000 a week, or ten million on a fiver. Excruciatingly poor. Like schoolkids on nitrous oxide

    Michael Foot got a lot of nasty criticism but he was at least an intelligent, thoughtful man (albeit misguided, to my mind), and he had some heavyweight people in his Shadow Cabinet. Major's Tories in 1997 were a pathetic spectacle, but that was due to exhaustion, defeatism, and moral vacuity, rather than a total lack of brains and talent

    So Corbyn is the worst- but that is just my living memory. Maybe British democracy can furnish an even more lamentable example from the 1930s or 1880 or whatever. But I'd be surprised
    Well, there was that bloke with the messy hair who hid in a fridge, dodged interviews, and seemed oblivious of the assembled press and television cameras when claiming a hospital visit was not a photo op.
    That's it, really. We forget it now, because an 80 seat majority really is a decisive win. But one of the strands of the 2019 election really was "OMG, why have we got the two most unsuitable candidates for PM ever?" And Johnson won- and for all I think he is a terrible person and a disaster for this country and I wish he didn't have the sort of majority that lets a PM do pretty much whatever they damn well please- he was less awful than the alternative.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    "the single shittest collection of politicians ever assembled"

    Tom Peck of Indepedent.


    Seems a little excessive to me. Misguided, deluded, dreamers, fantasy merchants maybe. But I think 1920s Germany as just one example had a shitter collection.

    "Ever assembled in British history" might be fair. Corbyn's Labour was remarkabe

    And, if you're judging by sheer results, Hitler did win his election, in the end
    Yes, ever in British history probably does work. At least since franchise and democracy. There's probably some gang of Anglo Saxon clerics and warrior kings who took control of Mercia or wherever who were even worse.
    Agreed.

    I cannot think of a worse leadership/front bench combination, presented to the British people by Her Majesty's Opposition or Govt, than that of Corbyn & Labour in 2017-19. I mean, FFS. just the memory of Diane Abbott unable to say whether we were having 10,000 new policeman on £100,000 a week, or ten million on a fiver. Excruciatingly poor. Like schoolkids on nitrous oxide

    Michael Foot got a lot of nasty criticism but he was at least an intelligent, thoughtful man (albeit misguided, to my mind), and he had some heavyweight people in his Shadow Cabinet. Major's Tories in 1997 were a pathetic spectacle, but that was due to exhaustion, defeatism, and moral vacuity, rather than a total lack of brains and talent

    So Corbyn is the worst- but that is just my living memory. Maybe British democracy can furnish an even more lamentable example from the 1930s or 1880 or whatever. But I'd be surprised
    Well, there was that bloke with the messy hair who hid in a fridge, dodged interviews, and seemed oblivious of the assembled press and television cameras when claiming a hospital visit was not a photo op.
    That's it, really. We forget it now, because an 80 seat majority really is a decisive win. But one of the strands of the 2019 election really was "OMG, why have we got the two most unsuitable candidates for PM ever?" And Johnson won- and for all I think he is a terrible person and a disaster for this country and I wish he didn't have the sort of majority that lets a PM do pretty much whatever they damn well please- he was less awful than the alternative.
    In a bizarre way, Boris was Biden to Corbyn's Trump
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,505

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    SKS wasn't leader at the 2019 GE.

    Jezza was!
    What was the main reason you voted Tory in 2019 Sunil?

    I recall you voted Labour in 2017?

    What changed your vote (main reason only)
  • MattWMattW Posts: 10,741
    edited September 28
    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Evening all. As someone some of us remember used to say.

    Topped up with petrol this evening prior to a long drive Thursday.
    No queue, no limit of what I could buy.

    What a mess the USA is in. I suspect Trump won't be able to run again, either as a result of health problems, or legal ones

    Come to that, what a mess UK is in.

    Of the three petrol stations within a few miles of me, two were out of fuel today.

    I did a 10-mile run in Peterborough today, whilst Mrs J's car was having its service and MOT.
    A few random thoughts:
    *) A petrol station I passed had all fuel and no queues. £30 limit on transactions.
    *) Peterborough isn't the prettiest places, but I managed to run three miles south to the centre on good roadside cycle paths, with no on-level road crossings. Impressive.
    *) Six or seven men drinking from cans of lager in various places. All alone. Quite a sad sight in the early afternoon.
    *) On the way back, I ran through an underpass where three youths on bikes with hoods up were smoking something a little heavy on the nose. A young woman cycled past me, saw the youths, stopped, turned around, and headed back past me.

    The latter was particularly poignant. I have little fear in running or walking anywhere - I feel as though I face more danger from traffic than I do people. Yet I know female friends who are fearful of being out and about alone. It's easy for me, as a man, to forget that ...
    There was a good thread on this on Twitter. Men just don't realise how scary it is for women to run or jog or walk alone at night, even in fairly safe neighbourhoods.

    I confess I seldom consider it. I would walk anywhere in London alone, at any time. Sure there are sketchier places where I would be watchful, and cross the road maybe, and certainly not get a flashy iPhone out to call and browse, but yeah I would walk anywhere, at any time, in London, without too much worry

    For some women they just won't go out alone after dark. That's it

    I was mugged in the evening in Hampstead, near the Royal Free. Druggie with a bloody heavy stick.
    More of my male friends in London have been mugged than female. But, on reflection, that's probably because my male friends go out all hours to all places, without a thought, and my female friends are WAY more cautious
    True. It's also simply the case that men are statistically more often victims of violent crime.

    The main mf point is that perpetrators are overwhelmingly male, of course.

  • FF43FF43 Posts: 12,887

    kle4 said:

    Evening all :)

    Recovering from my cold slowly. Just got a nice 6K run in and feeling good.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-58718835

    Keir Starmer gets it, it’s time to tell the left where to stick it.

    You can tell em to stick it all you like. The Labour Party is completely split.
    Good. The whole point is to splinter the left away, and leave them to their delusions well away from the corridors of power.
    Unityis much overpraised as a virtue. Causes people to silence their own doubts. Gets called for even when views and options are diametrically opposed.
    People on this website were openly mocking Boris in autumn 2019 for "splitting" the Tories and "losing" May's majority (which only existed if you counted the DUP anyway).

    But that division marked a closure and allowed the party to move on with an agenda they could unite behind.

    Starmer needs the same. He needs to oust his own Gaukeward squad which in his case is the far left extremists.

    He should also expel anyone who uses the word comrade from now on. The UK isn't the USSR.
    In Chinese the word "Comrade" now refers to gays. So maybe Starmer could exhort "Comrades, rise up!" and get a different response
  • https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    SKS wasn't leader at the 2019 GE.

    Jezza was!
    What was the main reason you voted Tory in 2019 Sunil?

    I recall you voted Labour in 2017?

    What changed your vote (main reason only)
    No, I voted Labour in 2015. I voted Tory in both of 2017 and 2019.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Evening all. As someone some of us remember used to say.

    Topped up with petrol this evening prior to a long drive Thursday.
    No queue, no limit of what I could buy.

    What a mess the USA is in. I suspect Trump won't be able to run again, either as a result of health problems, or legal ones

    Come to that, what a mess UK is in.

    Of the three petrol stations within a few miles of me, two were out of fuel today.

    I did a 10-mile run in Peterborough today, whilst Mrs J's car was having its service and MOT.
    A few random thoughts:
    *) A petrol station I passed had all fuel and no queues. £30 limit on transactions.
    *) Peterborough isn't the prettiest places, but I managed to run three miles south to the centre on good roadside cycle paths, with no on-level road crossings. Impressive.
    *) Six or seven men drinking from cans of lager in various places. All alone. Quite a sad sight in the early afternoon.
    *) On the way back, I ran through an underpass where three youths on bikes with hoods up were smoking something a little heavy on the nose. A young woman cycled past me, saw the youths, stopped, turned around, and headed back past me.

    The latter was particularly poignant. I have little fear in running or walking anywhere - I feel as though I face more danger from traffic than I do people. Yet I know female friends who are fearful of being out and about alone. It's easy for me, as a man, to forget that ...
    There was a good thread on this on Twitter. Men just don't realise how scary it is for women to run or jog or walk alone at night, even in fairly safe neighbourhoods.

    I confess I seldom consider it. I would walk anywhere in London alone, at any time. Sure there are sketchier places where I would be watchful, and cross the road maybe, and certainly not get a flashy iPhone out to call and browse, but yeah I would walk anywhere, at any time, in London, without too much worry

    For some women they just won't go out alone after dark. That's it

    I was mugged in the evening in Hampstead, near the Royal Free. Druggie with a bloody heavy stick.
    More of my male friends in London have been mugged than female. But, on reflection, that's probably because my male friends go out all hours to all places, without a thought, and my female friends are WAY more cautious
    I think men are more likely to be robbed or assaulted, and some of that may be being more likely to be out and about. It is more sexual threats from the sleazy through to the fatal that women fear.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 2,738

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    SKS wasn't leader at the 2019 GE.

    Jezza was!
    What was the main reason you voted Tory in 2019 Sunil?

    I recall you voted Labour in 2017?

    What changed your vote (main reason only)
    No, I voted Labour in 2015. I voted Tory in both of 2017 and 2019.
    Passed the crossover age!
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 5,162
    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Evening all. As someone some of us remember used to say.

    Topped up with petrol this evening prior to a long drive Thursday.
    No queue, no limit of what I could buy.

    What a mess the USA is in. I suspect Trump won't be able to run again, either as a result of health problems, or legal ones

    Come to that, what a mess UK is in.

    Of the three petrol stations within a few miles of me, two were out of fuel today.

    I did a 10-mile run in Peterborough today, whilst Mrs J's car was having its service and MOT.
    A few random thoughts:
    *) A petrol station I passed had all fuel and no queues. £30 limit on transactions.
    *) Peterborough isn't the prettiest places, but I managed to run three miles south to the centre on good roadside cycle paths, with no on-level road crossings. Impressive.
    *) Six or seven men drinking from cans of lager in various places. All alone. Quite a sad sight in the early afternoon.
    *) On the way back, I ran through an underpass where three youths on bikes with hoods up were smoking something a little heavy on the nose. A young woman cycled past me, saw the youths, stopped, turned around, and headed back past me.

    The latter was particularly poignant. I have little fear in running or walking anywhere - I feel as though I face more danger from traffic than I do people. Yet I know female friends who are fearful of being out and about alone. It's easy for me, as a man, to forget that ...
    There was a good thread on this on Twitter. Men just don't realise how scary it is for women to run or jog or walk alone at night, even in fairly safe neighbourhoods.

    I confess I seldom consider it. I would walk anywhere in London alone, at any time. Sure there are sketchier places where I would be watchful, and cross the road maybe, and certainly not get a flashy iPhone out to call and browse, but yeah I would walk anywhere, at any time, in London, without too much worry

    For some women they just won't go out alone after dark. That's it

    I was mugged in the evening in Hampstead, near the Royal Free. Druggie with a bloody heavy stick.
    More of my male friends in London have been mugged than female. But, on reflection, that's probably because my male friends go out all hours to all places, without a thought, and my female friends are WAY more cautious
    True. It's also simply the case that men are statistically more often victims of violent crime.

    The main mf point is that perpetrators are overwhelmingly male, of course.
    Most people believe that they are above-average skill drivers, so they underestimate the risks they are taking when driving.

    I'd guess a similar effect is at play with male confidence to head out at night. We tend to think that we can run off, or can deter an attempted attack, when we are less safe then we think. Most women are all too aware of being smaller than most men, and face enough low-level harassment during the day that they have an exaggerated fear of being out alone at night.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    How was that not a straight red for KDB?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 12,637

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    Not as much as for you if Starmer were to win.
  • paulyork64paulyork64 Posts: 1,821
    Les Repulicains will choose their Presidential candidate during a closed conference on 4th december. This is thought to favour Bertrand over Pecresse and Barnier.

    Cant put link up on my phone but google should find the article on rfi.fr.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,142

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
    I don't think Miliband is really responsible for Scotland. The SNP passed Labour back in 2006 (polling). 2010 was the anomaly, with Labour clinging to its vote in the FPTP system. The other Scotland-wide votes, in 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2021 all saw the SNP finish with the most votes.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,505
    Nelson Mandela would be expelled from Keir Starmer’s Labour Party for racism & antisemitism because of his antiracism, critical views on Israel & support for Palestine. This is how absurd & appalling the Labour Party has become.

    I will follow Sunil in 2024 more than likely
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,505

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    SKS wasn't leader at the 2019 GE.

    Jezza was!
    What was the main reason you voted Tory in 2019 Sunil?

    I recall you voted Labour in 2017?

    What changed your vote (main reason only)
    No, I voted Labour in 2015. I voted Tory in both of 2017 and 2019.
    What was your primary reason for switching BREXIT or Jezza not allowed to say both
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 5,624
    Do Labour types call each other "comrade" in normal meetings, or just at 'Conference' (without the definite article)? It sounds like tongue in cheek.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    Farooq said:

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
    I don't think Miliband is really responsible for Scotland. The SNP passed Labour back in 2006 (polling). 2010 was the anomaly, with Labour clinging to its vote in the FPTP system. The other Scotland-wide votes, in 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2021 all saw the SNP finish with the most votes.
    Yes, I think it was having Brown as PM that meant Labour held Scotland in 2010.

    It was SLAB campaigning with the Tories in 2014 that put a bucket full of nails in their coffin.
  • TresTres Posts: 594
    MrEd said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    On topic, if Trump wants the nomination, he will get it and it is increasingly clear he does. Also, he is playing a smart game by keeping relatively quiet. That might not be a popular idea on here given the consensus that Trump is a stupid buffoon but he is a lot smarter than many give him credit for.

    There was also a good piece by Conrad Black today, which won’t please many on here but the link is below. With regards to his comments on the 2020 election, they will make many here choke but, quite frankly, that’s not important - this is what the GOP is thinking about what happened in November:

    https://amgreatness.com/2021/09/27/democrats-repeat-the-mistakes-of-2016/

    Final point. I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means ie his election will be illegitimate. Ironically, there is a fair bit of overlap between those who are the strongest in pushing this view and those who are most shrill about saying how the GOP’s conduct remains the biggest threat to American democracy. It doesn’t seem to occur to many on here that Trump may win because people will be sick of Biden’s incompetence but it is worrying that we are starting to see the building blocks being out in place to claim any Trump 2024 win is, by default, illegitimate.

    "I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means"

    Really?

    Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't seen a single comment along those lines.

    Presumably you have plenty of examples.
    I think you have just had a few examples post your question with one poster admirably admitting his comments could be interpreted as such. And that Trump is a cheat. Plus another one who said that Republican cheating had been going on for years. It’s clear there will be a good solid group - as post-2016 - who would take the view that Trump could not have won legitimately and therefore must have cheated
    Anyone who plays golf knows that Trump is a cheat.
  • NorthofStokeNorthofStoke Posts: 1,096

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
    You can make a very good case that Ed Milliband is the single person most responsible for our current travails. Without his defeat of his brother no Corbyn, no Brexit, no May or Johnstone premierships. And he was responsible for the Climate Change Act so his trail of destruction is not yet complete.
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,142
    Foxy said:

    Farooq said:

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
    I don't think Miliband is really responsible for Scotland. The SNP passed Labour back in 2006 (polling). 2010 was the anomaly, with Labour clinging to its vote in the FPTP system. The other Scotland-wide votes, in 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2021 all saw the SNP finish with the most votes.
    Yes, I think it was having Brown as PM that meant Labour held Scotland in 2010.

    It was SLAB campaigning with the Tories in 2014 that put a bucket full of nails in their coffin.
    I honestly think 2014 is overplayed. It's an easy story to reach for, but the rot was set in before then. Any understanding of what went wrong for Labour in Scotland needs to take 2011 into account.
    So yes, you're right, nails in the coffin. But why was Labour in the coffin in the first place?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 90,376
    Foxy said:

    Farooq said:

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
    I don't think Miliband is really responsible for Scotland. The SNP passed Labour back in 2006 (polling). 2010 was the anomaly, with Labour clinging to its vote in the FPTP system. The other Scotland-wide votes, in 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2021 all saw the SNP finish with the most votes.
    Yes, I think it was having Brown as PM that meant Labour held Scotland in 2010.

    It was SLAB campaigning with the Tories in 2014 that put a bucket full of nails in their coffin.
    Yes but had Scotland gone independent Labour would have near zero chance of electing Starmer as PM.

    Given the SNP will back Labour over the Tories at Westminster anyway an SLab revival is less important for Labour than a redwall revival
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 17,505
    geoffw said:

    Do Labour types call each other "comrade" in normal meetings, or just at 'Conference' (without the definite article)? It sounds like tongue in cheek.

    I use Comrade with my Socialist friends as a term of endearment.

    I use Comrade with my Right Wing Labour acquaintances because I know how much it winds them up
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    Farooq said:

    Foxy said:

    Farooq said:

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
    I don't think Miliband is really responsible for Scotland. The SNP passed Labour back in 2006 (polling). 2010 was the anomaly, with Labour clinging to its vote in the FPTP system. The other Scotland-wide votes, in 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2021 all saw the SNP finish with the most votes.
    Yes, I think it was having Brown as PM that meant Labour held Scotland in 2010.

    It was SLAB campaigning with the Tories in 2014 that put a bucket full of nails in their coffin.
    I honestly think 2014 is overplayed. It's an easy story to reach for, but the rot was set in before then. Any understanding of what went wrong for Labour in Scotland needs to take 2011 into account.
    So yes, you're right, nails in the coffin. But why was Labour in the coffin in the first place?
    Same as what happened in the Red Wall. Neglect of core voters that they didn't think had anywhere else to go.
  • https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
    You can make a very good case that Ed Milliband is the single person most responsible for our current travails. Without his defeat of his brother no Corbyn, no Brexit, no May or Johnstone premierships. And he was responsible for the Climate Change Act so his trail of destruction is not yet complete.
    Harsh.

    But he gave us that bacon sarnie moment.
  • TimTTimT Posts: 4,707
    Time to tap into the PB Brains Trust. I probably have my first ever trip to Baku coming up in November - 2 weeks. Anything on the recommended activity/places to visit must do list?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 5,624

    geoffw said:

    Do Labour types call each other "comrade" in normal meetings, or just at 'Conference' (without the definite article)? It sounds like tongue in cheek.

    I use Comrade with my Socialist friends as a term of endearment.

    I use Comrade with my Right Wing Labour acquaintances because I know how much it winds them up
    You will always be tovarich to me.

  • geoffw said:

    Do Labour types call each other "comrade" in normal meetings, or just at 'Conference' (without the definite article)? It sounds like tongue in cheek.

    I use Comrade with my Socialist friends as a term of endearment.

    I use Comrade with my Right Wing Labour acquaintances because I know how much it winds them up
    "Comrades, this is your Leader. It is an honour to speak to you today, and I am honoured to be sailing with you on the maiden voyage of our Party's most recent achievement. Once more, we play our dangerous game, a game of chess against our old adversary — The Conservative Party. For a hundred years, your fathers before you and your older brothers played this game and played it well. But today the game is different. We have the advantage. It reminds me of the heady days of 1945 and Clement Attlee, when the world trembled at the sound of our Nationalisations! Well, they will tremble again — at the sound of our Glorious Campaign in favour of, um, I mean *against* Anti-Semitism. The order is: engage the Corbyn Drive!

    "Comrades, our own Parliamentary Party don't know our full potential. They will do everything possible to test us; but they will only test their own embarrassment. We will leave our MPs behind, we will pass through the Conservative patrols, past their sonar nets, and lay off their largest constituency, and listen to their chortling and tittering... while we conduct Austerity Debates! Then, and when we are finished, the only sound they will hear is our laughter, while we sail to Islington, where the sun is warm, and so is the... Comradeship!

    "A great day, Comrades! We sail into history!"
  • FarooqFarooq Posts: 2,142

    Les Repulicains will choose their Presidential candidate during a closed conference on 4th december. This is thought to favour Bertrand over Pecresse and Barnier.

    Cant put link up on my phone but google should find the article on rfi.fr.

    Can Bertrand rustle up enough votes?
  • https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    SKS wasn't leader at the 2019 GE.

    Jezza was!
    What was the main reason you voted Tory in 2019 Sunil?

    I recall you voted Labour in 2017?

    What changed your vote (main reason only)
    No, I voted Labour in 2015. I voted Tory in both of 2017 and 2019.
    What was your primary reason for switching BREXIT or Jezza not allowed to say both
    I also voted Tory in 2010, so 2015 was the anomaly. I think it was just a "pity-vote" for Ed, really :lol:
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 5,624
    It's really heart warming that Conference always ends by singing the Christmas Tree song and only 84 shopping days left.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    edited September 28
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    MattW said:

    Leon said:

    Evening all. As someone some of us remember used to say.

    Topped up with petrol this evening prior to a long drive Thursday.
    No queue, no limit of what I could buy.

    What a mess the USA is in. I suspect Trump won't be able to run again, either as a result of health problems, or legal ones

    Come to that, what a mess UK is in.

    Of the three petrol stations within a few miles of me, two were out of fuel today.

    I did a 10-mile run in Peterborough today, whilst Mrs J's car was having its service and MOT.
    A few random thoughts:
    *) A petrol station I passed had all fuel and no queues. £30 limit on transactions.
    *) Peterborough isn't the prettiest places, but I managed to run three miles south to the centre on good roadside cycle paths, with no on-level road crossings. Impressive.
    *) Six or seven men drinking from cans of lager in various places. All alone. Quite a sad sight in the early afternoon.
    *) On the way back, I ran through an underpass where three youths on bikes with hoods up were smoking something a little heavy on the nose. A young woman cycled past me, saw the youths, stopped, turned around, and headed back past me.

    The latter was particularly poignant. I have little fear in running or walking anywhere - I feel as though I face more danger from traffic than I do people. Yet I know female friends who are fearful of being out and about alone. It's easy for me, as a man, to forget that ...
    There was a good thread on this on Twitter. Men just don't realise how scary it is for women to run or jog or walk alone at night, even in fairly safe neighbourhoods.

    I confess I seldom consider it. I would walk anywhere in London alone, at any time. Sure there are sketchier places where I would be watchful, and cross the road maybe, and certainly not get a flashy iPhone out to call and browse, but yeah I would walk anywhere, at any time, in London, without too much worry

    For some women they just won't go out alone after dark. That's it

    I was mugged in the evening in Hampstead, near the Royal Free. Druggie with a bloody heavy stick.
    More of my male friends in London have been mugged than female. But, on reflection, that's probably because my male friends go out all hours to all places, without a thought, and my female friends are WAY more cautious
    I think men are more likely to be robbed or assaulted, and some of that may be being more likely to be out and about. It is more sexual threats from the sleazy through to the fatal that women fear.
    Suddenly and belatedly more aware of this issue, I was walking down the Regent's Canal towpath in Camden about 3 hours ago, before dusk, and two blonde young female joggers came past a large group of quite druggy young men (I'm not libelling them, the guys were clearly dealing, and rolling big joints etc)

    One of the guys leered and said "you look nice in your runners, darling" in a faintly aggressive but also friendly-sexual way - ie to my mind, if the girl was in the right mood, she could have seen it merely as a verbal wolf-whistle, and a compliment to her good looks

    But as I walked on I imagined what that interaction might feel like later, if the girl was, say, alone, jogging, at night - it would surely feel deeply threatening, and nothing else. A large group of young men, making overtly sexual remarks? By a canal?

    Hmm. Men just never get this, or very rarely, anyway
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 1,668
    edited September 28
    Tres said:

    MrEd said:

    rcs1000 said:

    MrEd said:

    On topic, if Trump wants the nomination, he will get it and it is increasingly clear he does. Also, he is playing a smart game by keeping relatively quiet. That might not be a popular idea on here given the consensus that Trump is a stupid buffoon but he is a lot smarter than many give him credit for.

    There was also a good piece by Conrad Black today, which won’t please many on here but the link is below. With regards to his comments on the 2020 election, they will make many here choke but, quite frankly, that’s not important - this is what the GOP is thinking about what happened in November:

    https://amgreatness.com/2021/09/27/democrats-repeat-the-mistakes-of-2016/

    Final point. I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means ie his election will be illegitimate. Ironically, there is a fair bit of overlap between those who are the strongest in pushing this view and those who are most shrill about saying how the GOP’s conduct remains the biggest threat to American democracy. It doesn’t seem to occur to many on here that Trump may win because people will be sick of Biden’s incompetence but it is worrying that we are starting to see the building blocks being out in place to claim any Trump 2024 win is, by default, illegitimate.

    "I’m noticing a worrying trend on here that, if Trump does run again in 2024, the only way he will win is by fraud / illegitimate means"

    Really?

    Maybe I've missed it, but I haven't seen a single comment along those lines.

    Presumably you have plenty of examples.
    I think you have just had a few examples post your question with one poster admirably admitting his comments could be interpreted as such. And that Trump is a cheat. Plus another one who said that Republican cheating had been going on for years. It’s clear there will be a good solid group - as post-2016 - who would take the view that Trump could not have won legitimately and therefore must have cheated
    Anyone who plays golf knows that Trump is a cheat.
    Yes, and cheating at golf is a massive red flag. Hence the infamous scene from Goldfinger.

    (Filmed at Stoke Poges GC - they are quite proud of it there)

    Trump does bear a resemblance.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 569
    I like Ed Miliband but he allowed the Tories that majority in 2015 when his brother David would have done much better . From there with the majority Cameron called his stupid referendum and the rest is history .
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 16,465
    I know this was posted this morning



    and here we are...

    They've called in the army. https://twitter.com/bealejonathan/status/1442902971818262530
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,704
    nico679 said:

    I like Ed Miliband but he allowed the Tories that majority in 2015 when his brother David would have done much better . From there with the majority Cameron called his stupid referendum and the rest is history .

    I cannot blame him for not seeing that his brother 'would have done much better'. Narrowly, under their system, the party disagreed. If he thought he would do better he shouldn't have stood aside to let his brother have his turn.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 69,704

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
    You can make a very good case that Ed Milliband is the single person most responsible for our current travails. Without his defeat of his brother no Corbyn, no Brexit, no May or Johnstone premierships. And he was responsible for the Climate Change Act so his trail of destruction is not yet complete.
    Harsh.

    But he gave us that bacon sarnie moment.
    You raise that before the EdStone?!

    I love it more with every passing year, I live in hope some clueless adviser, and clueless leader, and clueless campaign teams, can talk through such an idea over and over and still say 'Yep, this will work'.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 12,861
    TimT said:

    Time to tap into the PB Brains Trust. I probably have my first ever trip to Baku coming up in November - 2 weeks. Anything on the recommended activity/places to visit must do list?

    Baku is brilliant

    Check out the Zoroastrian fire-shrines, the burning hill, the amazing Soviet oil industry dereliction. Go drinking, it has a fab atmos. The food is intriguing and the Iran-Slav mixed race women often stunning

    The markets were also great when I was there, but this is well over a decade ago, and oil money has changed it rapidly, I have been told

    With two weeks you have the chance to explore. Azerbaijan is tremendously weird. The higher you get into the hills and the countryside, the better and stranger it is. Check the mad Jewish towns surviving from the 5th century BC. Entire villages in the Caucasus where, suddenly, everyone is ginger

    Superb place. Have fun
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 21,319
    edited September 28
    Farooq said:

    Foxy said:

    Farooq said:

    https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1442923393288847361

    "We never would have lost two elections in a row"

    2017 was the biggest increase in vote for Labour since WW2

    2019 was about Labour's stupid 2nd referendum policy courtesy of SKS.

    2023/4 is going to be a massive disappointment for you CHB.
    It was Ed Miliband in 2015 (not as left wing as Corbyn) who wrecked Labour.
    He lost Scotland, and took enough votes off the LDs in the LD/Con marginals to give the Cons their majority.
    I don't think Miliband is really responsible for Scotland. The SNP passed Labour back in 2006 (polling). 2010 was the anomaly, with Labour clinging to its vote in the FPTP system. The other Scotland-wide votes, in 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019, and 2021 all saw the SNP finish with the most votes.
    Yes, I think it was having Brown as PM that meant Labour held Scotland in 2010.

    It was SLAB campaigning with the Tories in 2014 that put a bucket full of nails in their coffin.
    I honestly think 2014 is overplayed. It's an easy story to reach for, but the rot was set in before then. Any understanding of what went wrong for Labour in Scotland needs to take 2011 into account.
    So yes, you're right, nails in the coffin. But why was Labour in the coffin in the first place?
    The Better Together campaign was (from a party political point of view) an enormous and total disaster for Scottish Labour. They actively campaigned against about 40% of their voting base and repeatedly insulted them and called the Nazis.
  • NorthofStokeNorthofStoke Posts: 1,096
    kle4 said:

    nico679 said:

    I like Ed Miliband but he allowed the Tories that majority in 2015 when his brother David would have done much better . From there with the majority Cameron called his stupid referendum and the rest is history .

    I cannot blame him for not seeing that his brother 'would have done much better'. Narrowly, under their system, the party disagreed. If he thought he would do better he shouldn't have stood aside to let his brother have his turn.
    We can only guess the psycho drama behind it. Both brothers seem to have an exaggerated view of their own abilities even for politicians. I am no fan of either but David would probably have prevented Cameron getting a majority so no Brexit referendum. To add to the charge sheet Ed was leader when the disastrous LP voting changes were introduced.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    Cracking Messi goal. Class from PSG.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 27,519
    edited September 28

    kle4 said:

    nico679 said:

    I like Ed Miliband but he allowed the Tories that majority in 2015 when his brother David would have done much better . From there with the majority Cameron called his stupid referendum and the rest is history .

    I cannot blame him for not seeing that his brother 'would have done much better'. Narrowly, under their system, the party disagreed. If he thought he would do better he shouldn't have stood aside to let his brother have his turn.
    We can only guess the psycho drama behind it. Both brothers seem to have an exaggerated view of their own abilities even for politicians. I am no fan of either but David would probably have prevented Cameron getting a majority so no Brexit referendum. To add to the charge sheet Ed was leader when the disastrous LP voting changes were introduced.
    David is the better media performer, but Ed has grown on me over the years and he is an astute judge of the problems of the country.
This discussion has been closed.