For the first time since December 6 – a poll without a LAB lead – politicalbetting.com

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

I suppose the difficult issue with Rishi's wealth is that he married it. Had he been a self-made man he could have highlighted his success as a strength.

That's not 100% true. He had 10 years doing pretty well working in the city. It seems highly unlikely he didn't make a significant amount of money himself out of that career.

It is just that he married into mega wealth.

Where as Call Me Dave, Mrs Cameron was the monied one and the much more successful one prior to him being PM. Didn't really hold him back.

A decade at Goldman, unless he got to partner level, will mean he got to a level of wealth to own a nice flat in London outright, or to have a relatively small mortgage on a slightly less nice house. Unless he was truly exceptional, I very much doubt he made anything near £10m from his time there (before tax), because he started relatively junior.

According to wikipedia, he only did 3 years at Goldman, then left and became a partner at The Children's Investment Fund Management by 2006, before then moving to Theleme Partners. And also director of investment firm Catamaran Ventures.

So looks like he was "partner" level and above for about 8 years.

TCI pays pretty well, but he won't have joined as a partner. (And, indeed, Chris is famous for rewriting contracts for staff, and the reality is that there is exactly only partner with equity there... and that's Chris)

Let's say he spent three years as an associate on 0.5m/year (which would be pretty exceptional), followed by another five as partner on 1.5m. Let's be generous and assume he then made 3m/year at Theleme.

That would be a seriously impressive haul - and easily in the top 0.5% of performers from a Goldman class. But still probably wouldn't get you to 30m in a decade.

boulay said:

Cyclefree said:

eek said:

darkage said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

I suppose the difficult issue with Rishi's wealth is that he married it. Had he been a self-made man he could have highlighted his success as a strength.

That's not 100% true. He had 10 years doing pretty well working in the city. It seems highly unlikely he didn't make a significant amount of money himself out of that career.

It is just that he married into mega wealth.

Where as Call Me Dave, Mrs Cameron was the monied one and the much more successful one prior to him being PM. Didn't really hold him back.

A decade at Goldman, unless he got to partner level, will mean he got to a level of wealth to own a nice flat in London outright, or to have a relatively small mortgage on a slightly less nice house. Unless he was truly exceptional, I very much doubt he made anything near £10m from his time there (before tax), because he started relatively junior.

He did three years at Goldman, then worked in hedge funds for another 7. Superficially, it is possible that he made a lot of money by way of his own raw talent, but it is equally possible that he was a dud and the latter part of his career was a front. Or it could be a mixture of the two. We don't know.

From memory don't we know that Rishi did make decent money from the hedge fund but I see to remember @Cyclefree commenting that things were not 100% kosher.

He presumably made good money at Goldmans and at The Childrens Investment Fund, the hedge fund where he worked after GS.

My comment was related to TCIF's behaviour, not Sunak personally.

He had a huge payday at TCIF but I imagine he also did very well as a founding partner of Theleme Partners after he left TCIF.

I wonder if his time doing holiday jobs as a waiter at a family friend’s Indian restaurant influenced his push on “Eat out to Help out”?

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

I suppose the difficult issue with Rishi's wealth is that he married it. Had he been a self-made man he could have highlighted his success as a strength.

That's not 100% true. He had 10 years doing pretty well working in the city. It seems highly unlikely he didn't make a significant amount of money himself out of that career.

It is just that he married into mega wealth.

Where as Call Me Dave, Mrs Cameron was the monied one and the much more successful one prior to him being PM. Didn't really hold him back.

A decade at Goldman, unless he got to partner level, will mean he got to a level of wealth to own a nice flat in London outright, or to have a relatively small mortgage on a slightly less nice house. Unless he was truly exceptional, I very much doubt he made anything near £10m from his time there (before tax), because he started relatively junior.

According to wikipedia, he only did 3 years at Goldman, then left and became a partner at The Children's Investment Fund Management by 2006, before then moving to Theleme Partners. And also director of investment firm Catamaran Ventures.

So looks like he was "partner" level and above for about 8 years.

TCI pays pretty well, but he won't have joined as a partner. (And, indeed, Chris is famous for rewriting contracts for staff, and the reality is that there is exactly only partner with equity there... and that's Chris)

Let's say he spent three years as an associate on 0.5m/year (which would be pretty exceptional), followed by another five as partner on 1.5m. Let's be generous and assume he then made 3m/year at Theleme.

That would be a seriously impressive haul - and easily in the top 0.5% of performers from a Goldman class. But still probably wouldn't get you to 30m in a decade.

Which I think is kinda of what I said originally...I just said he "doing pretty well" without stating any hard figures (for most people, even £5-10 million in 10 years is definitely that), but he married into the mega wealth.

MoonRabbit said:

MoonRabbit said:

boulay said:

MoonRabbit said:

Malmesbury said:

LostPassword said:

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

darkage said:

TimT said:

OK. I'll have a go.

Period of Putin doubling down, combined with increased Western disunity over both how much and what military aid to give Ukraine, and what to do about energy sanctions on Russia.

Massive continued suffering in Ukraine, but no buckling, even as new Russian reinforcements arrive and barrage of population areas intensifies.

Followed by: Ukrainians get hands on counter battery equipment, better AA kit, anti-ship kit and drones. After a stutter, Ukrainians again make slow progress at retaking land, and diminishing Russia's air and artillery capacity.

At which point, either:

- massive Western pressure on Ukraine to accept 'compromise' (i.e. give up land and rights) in order to reach an end to the war.
- Putin escalates to WW III. Everyone loses, but some more so than others. China wins.


In reality, no-one knows. There are too many ways things could go from now, any prediction is a crap shoot.

The question that I am interested in, is what exactly are Putin's options to escalate the conflict aside from nuclear war? It seems that the conventional Russian military capacity is taking an absolute hammering. Difficult to see how it could be rolled out to invade another country.

The Russians should be forced back to their own borders, forced to pay reparations, and the people involved should be tried for war crimes. No other outcome should be considered.

"what exactly are Putin's options to escalate the conflict aside from nuclear war?"

Chemical or biological weapons. Less bogeymanish and known to the general public, and easier to deny (look at the denialism over Assad's culpability for their use in Syria). In addition, the west does not have a set reaction to their use, or have similar weapons to immediately respond with AIUI.

Hence the use of chemical or biological weapons are something we cannot respond to in kind, and a nuclear retaliation would be OTT. And used right, they can be very useful.

Or alternatively Putin may go for a full mobilisation and war footing, and send hundreds of thousands of young Russians into Ukraine, killing many of them, but simply overwhelming the Ukrainian defences.

In tandem with this, expect a big attempt to split the sanctions regime against him - Germany seems an unsteady domino in that regard. The longer this goes on, the stronger sanctions should get. Sadly, they'll get weaker.

"Or alternatively Putin may go for a full mobilisation and war footing, and send hundreds of thousands of young Russians into Ukraine, killing many of them, but simply overwhelming the Ukrainian defences."

This assumes that sending lots of troops gets you something. The lesson of history is that while numbers are useful, an army that doesn't have logistics sorted out simply doesn't work. The initial Russian deployment to Ukraine is their best troops and what they *thought* they could sustain.

The logistics have broken down for their 200K force. Adding more soldiers might well make things worse.

It depends. If they've settled down to defensive positions on most fronts, then they may find it easier to improve the logistics situation, and they might get further only working with one advancing front, into which they'd pour their reinforcements.

Where are they going to get the extra logistical capability from?

Their friends?

Reminds me of a Beatles song. Think the lyrics go something like this. Big hit with conscripts.

What would you think if Invaded Ukraine?
Would you stand up and March in with me?
Lend me your troops and I'll bring them back dead
And I'll try not to start world war 3

Oh, I will fight with a little help from my friends
Mmm, I get fried with a little help from my friends
Ooh, I'm gonna die with a little help from my friends

LOL 👍🏻

Your seven lines alone better than 2 series of spitting image

Thought it better with image and couple of tweaks.

Soooo stuck in my head already



What would you think if I invaded Ukraine -
Would you stand up and March in with me?
Lend me your sons and I'll bring them back dead,
And I'll try not to start world war 3

Oh, I will fight with a little help from my friends,
Mmm, I get fried with a little help from my friends,
Ooh, I'm gonna die with a little help from my friends…

rcs1000 said:

boulay said:

Cyclefree said:

eek said:

darkage said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

I suppose the difficult issue with Rishi's wealth is that he married it. Had he been a self-made man he could have highlighted his success as a strength.

That's not 100% true. He had 10 years doing pretty well working in the city. It seems highly unlikely he didn't make a significant amount of money himself out of that career.

It is just that he married into mega wealth.

Where as Call Me Dave, Mrs Cameron was the monied one and the much more successful one prior to him being PM. Didn't really hold him back.

A decade at Goldman, unless he got to partner level, will mean he got to a level of wealth to own a nice flat in London outright, or to have a relatively small mortgage on a slightly less nice house. Unless he was truly exceptional, I very much doubt he made anything near £10m from his time there (before tax), because he started relatively junior.

He did three years at Goldman, then worked in hedge funds for another 7. Superficially, it is possible that he made a lot of money by way of his own raw talent, but it is equally possible that he was a dud and the latter part of his career was a front. Or it could be a mixture of the two. We don't know.

From memory don't we know that Rishi did make decent money from the hedge fund but I see to remember @Cyclefree commenting that things were not 100% kosher.

He presumably made good money at Goldmans and at The Childrens Investment Fund, the hedge fund where he worked after GS.

My comment was related to TCIF's behaviour, not Sunak personally.

He had a huge payday at TCIF but I imagine he also did very well as a founding partner of Theleme Partners after he left TCIF.

I wonder if his time doing holiday jobs as a waiter at a family friend’s Indian restaurant influenced his push on “Eat out to Help out”?

I didn't realise he was one of the founders of Theleme.

That's a $2bn hedge fund, so actually maybe $30m is far from impossible.

Theuniondivvie said:

Malmesbury said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

Macron blanks Boris at NATO summit and leads Biden right past him

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1507001983374266377?s=20&t=BxX84YQZ0YH3Ic7D19_SIQ

What’s this with selective video clips. Johnson had already spoken to Biden and Macron at the NATO meet and Macron as G7 host was escorting Biden to someone he hadn’t met yet! If “spotting slights” was an industry U.K. twitter would be world leading (if largely inaccurate!)

+1

It's rather like the games that photographers play - I can get a shot of *anyone* looking brilliant/ stupid/ murderous/ gormless/ anything.

Just give me 50 frames a second for long enough.

Some subjects are more helpful in this regard than others.

Malmesbury said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

Macron blanks Boris at NATO summit and leads Biden right past him

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1507001983374266377?s=20&t=BxX84YQZ0YH3Ic7D19_SIQ

What’s this with selective video clips. Johnson had already spoken to Biden and Macron at the NATO meet and Macron as G7 host was escorting Biden to someone he hadn’t met yet! If “spotting slights” was an industry U.K. twitter would be world leading (if largely inaccurate!)

+1

It's rather like the games that photographers play - I can get a shot of *anyone* looking brilliant/ stupid/ murderous/ gormless/ anything.

Just give me 50 frames a second for long enough.

Theuniondivvie said:

Malmesbury said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

Macron blanks Boris at NATO summit and leads Biden right past him

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1507001983374266377?s=20&t=BxX84YQZ0YH3Ic7D19_SIQ

What’s this with selective video clips. Johnson had already spoken to Biden and Macron at the NATO meet and Macron as G7 host was escorting Biden to someone he hadn’t met yet! If “spotting slights” was an industry U.K. twitter would be world leading (if largely inaccurate!)

+1

It's rather like the games that photographers play - I can get a shot of *anyone* looking brilliant/ stupid/ murderous/ gormless/ anything.

Just give me 50 frames a second for long enough.

Some subjects are more helpful in this regard than others.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Malmesbury said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

Macron blanks Boris at NATO summit and leads Biden right past him

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1507001983374266377?s=20&t=BxX84YQZ0YH3Ic7D19_SIQ

What’s this with selective video clips. Johnson had already spoken to Biden and Macron at the NATO meet and Macron as G7 host was escorting Biden to someone he hadn’t met yet! If “spotting slights” was an industry U.K. twitter would be world leading (if largely inaccurate!)

+1

It's rather like the games that photographers play - I can get a shot of *anyone* looking brilliant/ stupid/ murderous/ gormless/ anything.

Just give me 50 frames a second for long enough.

Some subjects are more helpful in this regard than others.

Now I know what Boris Johnson’s vinegar stroke looks like.

Applicant said:

Malmesbury said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

Macron blanks Boris at NATO summit and leads Biden right past him

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1507001983374266377?s=20&t=BxX84YQZ0YH3Ic7D19_SIQ

What’s this with selective video clips. Johnson had already spoken to Biden and Macron at the NATO meet and Macron as G7 host was escorting Biden to someone he hadn’t met yet! If “spotting slights” was an industry U.K. twitter would be world leading (if largely inaccurate!)

+1

It's rather like the games that photographers play - I can get a shot of *anyone* looking brilliant/ stupid/ murderous/ gormless/ anything.

Just give me 50 frames a second for long enough.

For example: Jeremy Corbyn at Cheshunt station.

Applicant said:

MoonRabbit said:

MoonRabbit said:

boulay said:

MoonRabbit said:

Malmesbury said:

LostPassword said:

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

darkage said:

TimT said:

OK. I'll have a go.

Period of Putin doubling down, combined with increased Western disunity over both how much and what military aid to give Ukraine, and what to do about energy sanctions on Russia.

Massive continued suffering in Ukraine, but no buckling, even as new Russian reinforcements arrive and barrage of population areas intensifies.

Followed by: Ukrainians get hands on counter battery equipment, better AA kit, anti-ship kit and drones. After a stutter, Ukrainians again make slow progress at retaking land, and diminishing Russia's air and artillery capacity.

At which point, either:

- massive Western pressure on Ukraine to accept 'compromise' (i.e. give up land and rights) in order to reach an end to the war.
- Putin escalates to WW III. Everyone loses, but some more so than others. China wins.


In reality, no-one knows. There are too many ways things could go from now, any prediction is a crap shoot.

The question that I am interested in, is what exactly are Putin's options to escalate the conflict aside from nuclear war? It seems that the conventional Russian military capacity is taking an absolute hammering. Difficult to see how it could be rolled out to invade another country.

The Russians should be forced back to their own borders, forced to pay reparations, and the people involved should be tried for war crimes. No other outcome should be considered.

"what exactly are Putin's options to escalate the conflict aside from nuclear war?"

Chemical or biological weapons. Less bogeymanish and known to the general public, and easier to deny (look at the denialism over Assad's culpability for their use in Syria). In addition, the west does not have a set reaction to their use, or have similar weapons to immediately respond with AIUI.

Hence the use of chemical or biological weapons are something we cannot respond to in kind, and a nuclear retaliation would be OTT. And used right, they can be very useful.

Or alternatively Putin may go for a full mobilisation and war footing, and send hundreds of thousands of young Russians into Ukraine, killing many of them, but simply overwhelming the Ukrainian defences.

In tandem with this, expect a big attempt to split the sanctions regime against him - Germany seems an unsteady domino in that regard. The longer this goes on, the stronger sanctions should get. Sadly, they'll get weaker.

"Or alternatively Putin may go for a full mobilisation and war footing, and send hundreds of thousands of young Russians into Ukraine, killing many of them, but simply overwhelming the Ukrainian defences."

This assumes that sending lots of troops gets you something. The lesson of history is that while numbers are useful, an army that doesn't have logistics sorted out simply doesn't work. The initial Russian deployment to Ukraine is their best troops and what they *thought* they could sustain.

The logistics have broken down for their 200K force. Adding more soldiers might well make things worse.

It depends. If they've settled down to defensive positions on most fronts, then they may find it easier to improve the logistics situation, and they might get further only working with one advancing front, into which they'd pour their reinforcements.

Where are they going to get the extra logistical capability from?

Their friends?

Reminds me of a Beatles song. Think the lyrics go something like this. Big hit with conscripts.

What would you think if Invaded Ukraine?
Would you stand up and March in with me?
Lend me your troops and I'll bring them back dead
And I'll try not to start world war 3

Oh, I will fight with a little help from my friends
Mmm, I get fried with a little help from my friends
Ooh, I'm gonna die with a little help from my friends

LOL 👍🏻

Your seven lines alone better than 2 series of spitting image

Thought it better with image and couple of tweaks.

Soooo stuck in my head already



What would you think if I invaded Ukraine -
Would you stand up and March in with me?
Lend me your sons and I'll bring them back dead,
And I'll try not to start world war 3

Oh, I will fight with a little help from my friends,
Mmm, I get fried with a little help from my friends,
Ooh, I'm gonna die with a little help from my friends…

Help, I need an army
Help, not just any army
Help, you know I have to fight, help...

Applicant said:

MoonRabbit said:

MoonRabbit said:

boulay said:

MoonRabbit said:

Malmesbury said:

LostPassword said:

Malmesbury said:

JosiasJessop said:

darkage said:

TimT said:

OK. I'll have a go.

Period of Putin doubling down, combined with increased Western disunity over both how much and what military aid to give Ukraine, and what to do about energy sanctions on Russia.

Massive continued suffering in Ukraine, but no buckling, even as new Russian reinforcements arrive and barrage of population areas intensifies.

Followed by: Ukrainians get hands on counter battery equipment, better AA kit, anti-ship kit and drones. After a stutter, Ukrainians again make slow progress at retaking land, and diminishing Russia's air and artillery capacity.

At which point, either:

- massive Western pressure on Ukraine to accept 'compromise' (i.e. give up land and rights) in order to reach an end to the war.
- Putin escalates to WW III. Everyone loses, but some more so than others. China wins.


In reality, no-one knows. There are too many ways things could go from now, any prediction is a crap shoot.

The question that I am interested in, is what exactly are Putin's options to escalate the conflict aside from nuclear war? It seems that the conventional Russian military capacity is taking an absolute hammering. Difficult to see how it could be rolled out to invade another country.

The Russians should be forced back to their own borders, forced to pay reparations, and the people involved should be tried for war crimes. No other outcome should be considered.

"what exactly are Putin's options to escalate the conflict aside from nuclear war?"

Chemical or biological weapons. Less bogeymanish and known to the general public, and easier to deny (look at the denialism over Assad's culpability for their use in Syria). In addition, the west does not have a set reaction to their use, or have similar weapons to immediately respond with AIUI.

Hence the use of chemical or biological weapons are something we cannot respond to in kind, and a nuclear retaliation would be OTT. And used right, they can be very useful.

Or alternatively Putin may go for a full mobilisation and war footing, and send hundreds of thousands of young Russians into Ukraine, killing many of them, but simply overwhelming the Ukrainian defences.

In tandem with this, expect a big attempt to split the sanctions regime against him - Germany seems an unsteady domino in that regard. The longer this goes on, the stronger sanctions should get. Sadly, they'll get weaker.

"Or alternatively Putin may go for a full mobilisation and war footing, and send hundreds of thousands of young Russians into Ukraine, killing many of them, but simply overwhelming the Ukrainian defences."

This assumes that sending lots of troops gets you something. The lesson of history is that while numbers are useful, an army that doesn't have logistics sorted out simply doesn't work. The initial Russian deployment to Ukraine is their best troops and what they *thought* they could sustain.

The logistics have broken down for their 200K force. Adding more soldiers might well make things worse.

It depends. If they've settled down to defensive positions on most fronts, then they may find it easier to improve the logistics situation, and they might get further only working with one advancing front, into which they'd pour their reinforcements.

Where are they going to get the extra logistical capability from?

Their friends?

Reminds me of a Beatles song. Think the lyrics go something like this. Big hit with conscripts.

What would you think if Invaded Ukraine?
Would you stand up and March in with me?
Lend me your troops and I'll bring them back dead
And I'll try not to start world war 3

Oh, I will fight with a little help from my friends
Mmm, I get fried with a little help from my friends
Ooh, I'm gonna die with a little help from my friends

LOL 👍🏻

Your seven lines alone better than 2 series of spitting image

Thought it better with image and couple of tweaks.

Soooo stuck in my head already



What would you think if I invaded Ukraine -
Would you stand up and March in with me?
Lend me your sons and I'll bring them back dead,
And I'll try not to start world war 3

Oh, I will fight with a little help from my friends,
Mmm, I get fried with a little help from my friends,
Ooh, I'm gonna die with a little help from my friends…

Help, I need an army
Help, not just any army
Help, you know I have to fight, help...

kinabalu said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Malmesbury said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

Macron blanks Boris at NATO summit and leads Biden right past him

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1507001983374266377?s=20&t=BxX84YQZ0YH3Ic7D19_SIQ

What’s this with selective video clips. Johnson had already spoken to Biden and Macron at the NATO meet and Macron as G7 host was escorting Biden to someone he hadn’t met yet! If “spotting slights” was an industry U.K. twitter would be world leading (if largely inaccurate!)

+1

It's rather like the games that photographers play - I can get a shot of *anyone* looking brilliant/ stupid/ murderous/ gormless/ anything.

Just give me 50 frames a second for long enough.

Some subjects are more helpful in this regard than others.

What portrait photographers do - the great ones - is capture the essence of their subject.

This is a fine example of the art. Very much worth posting, I think.

Cyclefree said:

kinabalu said:

Cyclefree said:

eek said:

darkage said:

rcs1000 said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

I suppose the difficult issue with Rishi's wealth is that he married it. Had he been a self-made man he could have highlighted his success as a strength.

That's not 100% true. He had 10 years doing pretty well working in the city. It seems highly unlikely he didn't make a significant amount of money himself out of that career.

It is just that he married into mega wealth.

Where as Call Me Dave, Mrs Cameron was the monied one and the much more successful one prior to him being PM. Didn't really hold him back.

A decade at Goldman, unless he got to partner level, will mean he got to a level of wealth to own a nice flat in London outright, or to have a relatively small mortgage on a slightly less nice house. Unless he was truly exceptional, I very much doubt he made anything near £10m from his time there (before tax), because he started relatively junior.

He did three years at Goldman, then worked in hedge funds for another 7. Superficially, it is possible that he made a lot of money by way of his own raw talent, but it is equally possible that he was a dud and the latter part of his career was a front. Or it could be a mixture of the two. We don't know.

From memory don't we know that Rishi did make decent money from the hedge fund but I see to remember @Cyclefree commenting that things were not 100% kosher.

He presumably made good money at Goldmans and at The Childrens Investment Fund, the hedge fund where he worked after GS.

My comment was related to TCIF's behaviour, not Sunak personally.

Did you listen to that recent Lowball Tapes podcast? Some things there I hadn't realized, I must say.

None of it came as a surprise. But it relied too much on some very questionable statements made by Tom Hayes. I know stuff about him that I cannot reveal publicly here. Safe to say that when I hear his disingenuous nonsense (to put it at its absolute mildest) about how he was an innocent sacrificed by higher ups I want to throw things at the radio and TV. The truth about him is very different indeed. He was rightly convicted.

What annoys me about these programmes is how lazy the journalism is. The journalists rarely do any sort of digging around to get different views or, indeed, to get a view from the people who they know - or ought to - will have relevant information.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Malmesbury said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

Macron blanks Boris at NATO summit and leads Biden right past him

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1507001983374266377?s=20&t=BxX84YQZ0YH3Ic7D19_SIQ

What’s this with selective video clips. Johnson had already spoken to Biden and Macron at the NATO meet and Macron as G7 host was escorting Biden to someone he hadn’t met yet! If “spotting slights” was an industry U.K. twitter would be world leading (if largely inaccurate!)

+1

It's rather like the games that photographers play - I can get a shot of *anyone* looking brilliant/ stupid/ murderous/ gormless/ anything.

Just give me 50 frames a second for long enough.

Some subjects are more helpful in this regard than others.

Now I know what Boris Johnson’s vinegar stroke looks like.

boulay said:

kinabalu said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Malmesbury said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

Macron blanks Boris at NATO summit and leads Biden right past him

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1507001983374266377?s=20&t=BxX84YQZ0YH3Ic7D19_SIQ

What’s this with selective video clips. Johnson had already spoken to Biden and Macron at the NATO meet and Macron as G7 host was escorting Biden to someone he hadn’t met yet! If “spotting slights” was an industry U.K. twitter would be world leading (if largely inaccurate!)

+1

It's rather like the games that photographers play - I can get a shot of *anyone* looking brilliant/ stupid/ murderous/ gormless/ anything.

Just give me 50 frames a second for long enough.

Some subjects are more helpful in this regard than others.

What portrait photographers do - the great ones - is capture the essence of their subject.

This is a fine example of the art. Very much worth posting, I think.

It looks like a Lucien Freud painting.

boulay said:

kinabalu said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Malmesbury said:

rcs1000 said:

CarlottaVance said:

HYUFD said:

Macron blanks Boris at NATO summit and leads Biden right past him

https://twitter.com/mikegalsworthy/status/1507001983374266377?s=20&t=BxX84YQZ0YH3Ic7D19_SIQ

What’s this with selective video clips. Johnson had already spoken to Biden and Macron at the NATO meet and Macron as G7 host was escorting Biden to someone he hadn’t met yet! If “spotting slights” was an industry U.K. twitter would be world leading (if largely inaccurate!)

+1

It's rather like the games that photographers play - I can get a shot of *anyone* looking brilliant/ stupid/ murderous/ gormless/ anything.

Just give me 50 frames a second for long enough.

Some subjects are more helpful in this regard than others.

What portrait photographers do - the great ones - is capture the essence of their subject.

This is a fine example of the art. Very much worth posting, I think.

It looks like a Lucien Freud painting.

TimS said:

LLG on this poll is 54%. At the low end of the 53-57% long term range but certainly not an outlier. It looks like the Lib Dems are somewhat overstated to the detriment of Labour in this one. And REFUK is at the low end, though I expect it has probably declined anyway from its highs around 6-7% a couple of months back. But they were going to come home anyway, just as about half of those 6% of greens will come home too.

Another recent poll had LLG at 48% which was above the recent range.

I expect to see some more Tory-Labour switching following the budget, probably bypassing both LDs and Greens. Would say 12% is probably a ceiling for the yellows in this parliament.

Andy_JS said:

"Putin ‘at risk of coup’ by Russian security services"

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ukraine-war-putin-at-risk-of-coup-by-russian-security-services-vm6qgxtnp

theelephant said:

I think we can say after the newspaper headlines today and sunak looking uncomfortable as he was quizzed about his wife's Russian interests any chance he has of leading the conservative party is gone. He will soon be the most unpopular chancellor in history and I imagine by the age of 45 his political career will be all but over...basically he's just Tony Blair Mark 2 anyway...not what we need

ozymandias said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

theelephant said:

I think we can say after the newspaper headlines today and sunak looking uncomfortable as he was quizzed about his wife's Russian interests any chance he has of leading the conservative party is gone. He will soon be the most unpopular chancellor in history and I imagine by the age of 45 his political career will be all but over...basically he's just Tony Blair Mark 2 anyway...not what we need

I tend to agree. Bin for him. Truss is a total non starter too. That leaves people outside of the cabinet. Which is probably not a bad thing. Penny Mordaunt I'm thinking at the moment.

Javid.

Mexicanpete said:

ozymandias said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

theelephant said:

I think we can say after the newspaper headlines today and sunak looking uncomfortable as he was quizzed about his wife's Russian interests any chance he has of leading the conservative party is gone. He will soon be the most unpopular chancellor in history and I imagine by the age of 45 his political career will be all but over...basically he's just Tony Blair Mark 2 anyway...not what we need

I tend to agree. Bin for him. Truss is a total non starter too. That leaves people outside of the cabinet. Which is probably not a bad thing. Penny Mordaunt I'm thinking at the moment.

Javid.

Bless you!

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Fishing said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Oxford City Council has now awarded the "Headington Shark" official listed status as a heritage asset against the wishes of its current owner and despite the artwork being erected in protest against its own planning policies.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/24/oxfords-rooftop-shark-sculpture-gets-special-heritage-status/

Maybe the bloke who owns the place can give the Bristol statue topplers a ring.

The choice of listed buildings in this country is a joke.

It's OK until about 1900, though in fact it's difficult to go far wrong with buildings like Parliament or the Tower of London, but after about 1900 any taste goes out of the window. The modern buildings they have listed are often unbelievably awful. The shark isn't actually bad compared to some of them.

LostPassword said:

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Which is fine because the Nationalists wouldn't win a border poll in the near future, and so the Secretary of State shouldn't call one.

However, several years of Unionists struggling to come to terms with a Nationalist as First Minister, or keeping the institutions collapsed to avoid the same, would do a lot to make unification with the Republic look like a solution to Unionist obstructionism.

If Unionists want to preserve the status quo - Northern Ireland as part of the Union - they have to find a way to make the status quo work.

Luckyguy1983 said:

theelephant said:

I think we can say after the newspaper headlines today and sunak looking uncomfortable as he was quizzed about his wife's Russian interests any chance he has of leading the conservative party is gone. He will soon be the most unpopular chancellor in history and I imagine by the age of 45 his political career will be all but over...basically he's just Tony Blair Mark 2 anyway...not what we need

I tend to agree. Bin for him. Truss is a total non starter too. That leaves people outside of the cabinet. Which is probably not a bad thing. Penny Mordaunt I'm thinking at the moment.

HYUFD said:

LostPassword said:

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Which is fine because the Nationalists wouldn't win a border poll in the near future, and so the Secretary of State shouldn't call one.

However, several years of Unionists struggling to come to terms with a Nationalist as First Minister, or keeping the institutions collapsed to avoid the same, would do a lot to make unification with the Republic look like a solution to Unionist obstructionism.

If Unionists want to preserve the status quo - Northern Ireland as part of the Union - they have to find a way to make the status quo work.

If the Irish Sea border is removed then Unionists would be prepared to restore the Executive.

Hence the UK government will also invoke Art 16 in due course.

TheScreamingEagles said:

England are being shit at the cricket again.

ozymandias said:

Mexicanpete said:

ozymandias said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

theelephant said:

I think we can say after the newspaper headlines today and sunak looking uncomfortable as he was quizzed about his wife's Russian interests any chance he has of leading the conservative party is gone. He will soon be the most unpopular chancellor in history and I imagine by the age of 45 his political career will be all but over...basically he's just Tony Blair Mark 2 anyway...not what we need

I tend to agree. Bin for him. Truss is a total non starter too. That leaves people outside of the cabinet. Which is probably not a bad thing. Penny Mordaunt I'm thinking at the moment.

Javid.

Bless you!

Ta. Not Mordaunt. Three female (can I say that? People with Cervixes?) PM's for the Evil Tories is taking the proverbial.

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

LostPassword said:

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Which is fine because the Nationalists wouldn't win a border poll in the near future, and so the Secretary of State shouldn't call one.

However, several years of Unionists struggling to come to terms with a Nationalist as First Minister, or keeping the institutions collapsed to avoid the same, would do a lot to make unification with the Republic look like a solution to Unionist obstructionism.

If Unionists want to preserve the status quo - Northern Ireland as part of the Union - they have to find a way to make the status quo work.

If the Irish Sea border is removed then Unionists would be prepared to restore the Executive.

Hence the UK government will also invoke Art 16 in due course.

Which will upset almost everyone in NI other than the ones with their arses hanging out of the window in excitement at restarting the Troubles. So you are no better off and in fact much worse off.

Mexicanpete said:

...

HYUFD said:

LostPassword said:

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Which is fine because the Nationalists wouldn't win a border poll in the near future, and so the Secretary of State shouldn't call one.

However, several years of Unionists struggling to come to terms with a Nationalist as First Minister, or keeping the institutions collapsed to avoid the same, would do a lot to make unification with the Republic look like a solution to Unionist obstructionism.

If Unionists want to preserve the status quo - Northern Ireland as part of the Union - they have to find a way to make the status quo work.

If the Irish Sea border is removed then Unionists would be prepared to restore the Executive.

Hence the UK government will also invoke Art 16 in due course.

When will this occur? You have been suggesting triggering A16 has been imminent for months. Surely Johnson doesn't light the blue touch paper until the war in Ukraine is won. It wouldn't look like Western allies in lockstep.

eek said:

HYUFD said:

LostPassword said:

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Which is fine because the Nationalists wouldn't win a border poll in the near future, and so the Secretary of State shouldn't call one.

However, several years of Unionists struggling to come to terms with a Nationalist as First Minister, or keeping the institutions collapsed to avoid the same, would do a lot to make unification with the Republic look like a solution to Unionist obstructionism.

If Unionists want to preserve the status quo - Northern Ireland as part of the Union - they have to find a way to make the status quo work.

If the Irish Sea border is removed then Unionists would be prepared to restore the Executive.

Hence the UK government will also invoke Art 16 in due course.

In your dreams.

I suspect the UK Government is quite happy having control over NI affairs as it allows them to implement some of the things (abortion, a sane gambling act) the Unionists have spent years blocking

ozymandias said:

Why not have Ukraine federate with Poland. Becomes one country and at a stroke nullifying need for NATO or EU admission. Putin can get his bits in the East. Has the added benefit of Putin getting what he ultimately wants - Ukraine not being a sovereign nation. As it wouldn't be. The Greater Poland Federation. Sorted.

Fishing said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Oxford City Council has now awarded the "Headington Shark" official listed status as a heritage asset against the wishes of its current owner and despite the artwork being erected in protest against its own planning policies.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/24/oxfords-rooftop-shark-sculpture-gets-special-heritage-status/

Maybe the bloke who owns the place can give the Bristol statue topplers a ring.

The choice of listed buildings in this country is a joke.

It's OK until about 1900, though in fact it's difficult to go far wrong with buildings like Parliament or the Tower of London, but after about 1900 any taste goes out of the window. The modern buildings they have listed are often unbelievably awful. The shark isn't actually bad compared to some of them.

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

LostPassword said:

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Which is fine because the Nationalists wouldn't win a border poll in the near future, and so the Secretary of State shouldn't call one.

However, several years of Unionists struggling to come to terms with a Nationalist as First Minister, or keeping the institutions collapsed to avoid the same, would do a lot to make unification with the Republic look like a solution to Unionist obstructionism.

If Unionists want to preserve the status quo - Northern Ireland as part of the Union - they have to find a way to make the status quo work.

If the Irish Sea border is removed then Unionists would be prepared to restore the Executive.

Hence the UK government will also invoke Art 16 in due course.

Which will upset almost everyone in NI other than the ones with their arses hanging out of the window in excitement at restarting the Troubles. So you are no better off and in fact much worse off.

Unionists will be much better off and there will be no peace in NI unless their wishes are respected as much as Nationalists

eek said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Oxford City Council has now awarded the "Headington Shark" official listed status as a heritage asset against the wishes of its current owner and despite the artwork being erected in protest against its own planning policies.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/24/oxfords-rooftop-shark-sculpture-gets-special-heritage-status/

Maybe the bloke who owns the place can give the Bristol statue topplers a ring.

WTF was he doing buying that building if he wanted to remove it.

MattW said:

Fishing said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Oxford City Council has now awarded the "Headington Shark" official listed status as a heritage asset against the wishes of its current owner and despite the artwork being erected in protest against its own planning policies.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/24/oxfords-rooftop-shark-sculpture-gets-special-heritage-status/

Maybe the bloke who owns the place can give the Bristol statue topplers a ring.

The choice of listed buildings in this country is a joke.

It's OK until about 1900, though in fact it's difficult to go far wrong with buildings like Parliament or the Tower of London, but after about 1900 any taste goes out of the window. The modern buildings they have listed are often unbelievably awful. The shark isn't actually bad compared to some of them.

Whether X y or z is "awful" is pretty much a matter of fashion.

A few decades ago that was the accepted opinion of Georgian stuff. Which, tbf, is often built to hovel quality.

On the shark, this is mainly just the Telegraph flubbing; Oxford City Council does not have the power to award listed status.

It's probably just noted as interesting and local, which is fair enough.

ozymandias said:

Why not have Ukraine federate with Poland. Becomes one country and at a stroke nullifying need for NATO or EU admission. Putin can get his bits in the East. Has the added benefit of Putin getting what he ultimately wants - Ukraine not being a sovereign nation. As it wouldn't be. The Greater Poland Federation. Sorted.

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

LostPassword said:

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Which is fine because the Nationalists wouldn't win a border poll in the near future, and so the Secretary of State shouldn't call one.

However, several years of Unionists struggling to come to terms with a Nationalist as First Minister, or keeping the institutions collapsed to avoid the same, would do a lot to make unification with the Republic look like a solution to Unionist obstructionism.

If Unionists want to preserve the status quo - Northern Ireland as part of the Union - they have to find a way to make the status quo work.

If the Irish Sea border is removed then Unionists would be prepared to restore the Executive.

Hence the UK government will also invoke Art 16 in due course.

Which will upset almost everyone in NI other than the ones with their arses hanging out of the window in excitement at restarting the Troubles. So you are no better off and in fact much worse off.

Unionists will be much better off and there will be no peace in NI unless their wishes are respected as much as Nationalists

kle4 said:

An interesting piece on options for compromise and realism, noting such a seeking is not amoral, but may still be problematic to achieve

https://samf.substack.com/p/losing-wars-and-saving-face?r=15i4j0&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

LostPassword said:

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Which is fine because the Nationalists wouldn't win a border poll in the near future, and so the Secretary of State shouldn't call one.

However, several years of Unionists struggling to come to terms with a Nationalist as First Minister, or keeping the institutions collapsed to avoid the same, would do a lot to make unification with the Republic look like a solution to Unionist obstructionism.

If Unionists want to preserve the status quo - Northern Ireland as part of the Union - they have to find a way to make the status quo work.

If the Irish Sea border is removed then Unionists would be prepared to restore the Executive.

Hence the UK government will also invoke Art 16 in due course.

Which will upset almost everyone in NI other than the ones with their arses hanging out of the window in excitement at restarting the Troubles. So you are no better off and in fact much worse off.

Unionists will be much better off and there will be no peace in NI unless their wishes are respected as much as Nationalists

They're not the only ones in NI. And a lot of people like the current situation, including a lot of Unionist voters.

Nor are Nationalists the only ones in NI and 69% of Unionists want the NI Protocol scrapped. Only 21% of NI voters think there are no problems with it

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ulster-union-northern-ireland-polling-100000007.html

MattW said:

eek said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Oxford City Council has now awarded the "Headington Shark" official listed status as a heritage asset against the wishes of its current owner and despite the artwork being erected in protest against its own planning policies.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/24/oxfords-rooftop-shark-sculpture-gets-special-heritage-status/

Maybe the bloke who owns the place can give the Bristol statue topplers a ring.

WTF was he doing buying that building if he wanted to remove it.

He inherited it from his dad, who put the statue there.

As it .. er .. says in the article .

FrancisUrquhart said:

Oxford City Council has now awarded the "Headington Shark" official listed status as a heritage asset against the wishes of its current owner and despite the artwork being erected in protest against its own planning policies.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/24/oxfords-rooftop-shark-sculpture-gets-special-heritage-status/

Maybe the bloke who owns the place can give the Bristol statue topplers a ring.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Oxford City Council has now awarded the "Headington Shark" official listed status as a heritage asset against the wishes of its current owner and despite the artwork being erected in protest against its own planning policies.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/03/24/oxfords-rooftop-shark-sculpture-gets-special-heritage-status/

Maybe the bloke who owns the place can give the Bristol statue topplers a ring.

TheScreamingEagles said:

England are being shit at the cricket again.

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

LostPassword said:

HYUFD said:

Gary_Burton said:

https://twitter.com/SuzyJourno/status/1506674345581727750

'Recent opinion polls have left the DUP deeply worried. By significantly scaling back its Assy election candidate numbers, it's desperately trying to save the seats it holds. There's not one NI constituency where it has a really good chance of making a gain.'


Despite what HYUFD says I think he's wrong about the 'unionist block' (DUP+UUP+TUV) being certain to be ahead of nationalists (SDLP+SF) in terms of seats and both 'blocks' could easily end up level (although I admit the unionists are probably certain to get more votes than nationalists).

Something like this is an entirely plausible scenario:

SF 23 (-4)
DUP 20 (-8)
Alliance 14 (+6)
UUP 12 (+2)
SDLP 12 (-)
TUV 3 (+2)
PBP 2 (+1)
Grn 2 (-)
Others 2

Which still does not give Nationalists more seats than Unionists and as Unionists will have won more votes the NI Secretary will still refuse a border poll. Especially as the Alliance also oppose a border poll at present

Which is fine because the Nationalists wouldn't win a border poll in the near future, and so the Secretary of State shouldn't call one.

However, several years of Unionists struggling to come to terms with a Nationalist as First Minister, or keeping the institutions collapsed to avoid the same, would do a lot to make unification with the Republic look like a solution to Unionist obstructionism.

If Unionists want to preserve the status quo - Northern Ireland as part of the Union - they have to find a way to make the status quo work.

If the Irish Sea border is removed then Unionists would be prepared to restore the Executive.

Hence the UK government will also invoke Art 16 in due course.

Which will upset almost everyone in NI other than the ones with their arses hanging out of the window in excitement at restarting the Troubles. So you are no better off and in fact much worse off.

Unionists will be much better off and there will be no peace in NI unless their wishes are respected as much as Nationalists