Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
Violence would be a daft move because there are far more people willing and hoping to do violence to them than they could possibly imagine. All they are looking for is an excuse.
A few martyrs for the cause always works a treat.
‘This year’s Emily Wilding Davison medal goes to Jeremy X, beaten to death by ruddy faced commuters on the North Circular.’
Gluing your face to the middle of the M25 and then being clubbed to death by Pepsi bottles filled with piss sounds more like a Darwin Award.
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
You won't get anything by voting because both parties are fully signed up to the environutters' damaging agenda...
No they aren't. We are doing staggeringly little compared to what we could do. In 1970 you could fly London New York return for $500. you still can, when that should have inflated to $5000. If it was me I'd slap a 100% surcharge on all flights to everywhere, just for starters.
But then I am an idiot who doesn't realise this is all a gigantic hoax to enable poor brown third world people to steal all your money.
Well, yes, we could destroy the economy immediately in the pursuit of an unattainable goal, rather than just doing it slowly. Doesn't make much difference in the end.
Translation: there's a lot of BP in my pension and I don't have any children to worry about.
I don't know about my pension in that detail, but I do know that wrecking our economy in pursuit of an unattainable goal isn't any good for our children or grandchildren.
Maybe I'm an incurable optimist or maybe I read too much science, but I hope you're wrong about saving the environment being unattainable. When the cheapest electricity production method is renewables we surely have some hope of reducing our CO2 output before we hit an irreversible tipping point such as one caused by the melting ice or thawing permafrost. Change when it happens can be positive and can happen quickly, in fact it usually does, google the 'S Curve' for details. Say what you like about Elon Musk, he can be an idiot, but he's set us onto the steep part of the S curve as far as electric cars are concerned and we are seeing massive reductions in cost of solar and wind. So, I'm an optimist, but we could do with our politicians waking up and doing more to make us energy independent, let alone doing our bit to save the planet. The young people of the US have turned out to save the States from the lunatic right, maybe they will help the UK at the next election.
"Saving the environment" isn't exactly unattainable, but it will need an element of evolution.
"Stopping climate change" is unattainable.
"Slowing climate change" is unattainable by unilateral action, and any action the UK could take is going to be outweighed by what other countries are doign unless they change.
Physics happens, at a certain point the permafrost will thaw and release such an amount of CO2 and methane that climate change will accelerate dramatically, what would that do to our economy? Getting to net zero and removing some CO2will eventually stop climate change. These things aren't unattainable. You may have heard of COP27, nobody should be talking about unilateral action. Other countries are making changes in the right direction, but they and we all need to do more and quickly. The UK is not the worst regarding Climate Change, but " "None of the countries achieved positions one to three. No country is doing enough to prevent dangerous climate change." https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/countries-doing-the-most-to-fight-climate-change
COP27 like all the previous COP's is an utter waste of time and no more than a free junket for a photo op for politicians. They make a token agreement then all go home and break it. Complete and utter waste of time while pumping ton's of CO2 into the atmosphere.
“Western security advisers are warning delegates at the COP27 climate summit not to download the host Egyptian government's official smartphone app, amid fears it could be used to hack their private emails, texts and even voice conversations.”
You, me, all of us on here have access to the same information as Stop Oil. As the whole population.
It is not as though (cf smoking) there is a big conspiracy to portray climate change as anything other than a huge threat to mankind.
So why are people (you, me, (the whole population minus some greenies)) manifestly not altering our behaviour all that much. We need to jump in the car? We jump in the car. We need to fire up the computer to vanquish all on PB? We do that. We want to jet off to Ibitha or Thailand or Icelend? We do that also.
If we, the GBP, really wanted to reduce or fossil fuel consumption then we would do it. But we don't. Which does suggest we don't want to. Why? Is it a "Don't Look Up" scenario? Perhaps. Or perhaps people (cf Easter Island) are sailing, er motoring into oblivion.
But we don't want to change. And we are not changing. We do a bit, we recycle, we turn the light off as we walk out of the room, perhaps, but that's it. And tossers climbing up gantries on the M25 aren't likely to get us to change, odd moment of clarity on the way to LHR aside.
Firstly there are big campaigns to convince us global warming is a hoax. There front organisations have been cited here numerous times over the years.
Second, even Greta Thunberg acknowledges that there's a limited amount that individuals can do on their own. A lot of the necessary changes are changes of infrastructure, not personal consumer choice.
Secondly, when it comes to personal change, people rarely want to go out on a limb and appear weird by doing things differently. We saw this with the pandemic where usage of masks was low when it was only advised, but then increased when it was mandated. The assumption that most other people won't bother to change makes individuals feel that changing themselves is a waste of effort - unless the government forces everyone to comply.
We see a similar logic at play when people argue it's pointless for the UK to take action unless China does.
Those campaigns are far from the MSM and it is the MSM where the vast majority of people hang out.
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
Violence would be a daft move because there are far more people willing and hoping to do violence to them than they could possibly imagine. All they are looking for is an excuse.
A few martyrs for the cause always works a treat.
‘This year’s Emily Wilding Davison medal goes to Jeremy X, beaten to death by ruddy faced commuters on the North Circular.’
I think you overstate the public opinion of them.
I would think the public was pretty pissed off with EW Davison what with endangering horses and riders and screwing up the race.
I doubt it. Bothering a few toffs following the gee gees doesn't compare with stopping people reaching medical appointments or missing flights and job interviews. You know, real life rather than fantasy.
My colleague missed a flight to New York yesterday because of the protest - in the taxi for 5 hours! (I got the flight as I was taking a different route).
Interestingly though he seemed to be most irritated by the over talkative taxi driver who didn't shut up for the whole journey, and he reflected that "maybe someone's trying to tell me something about the sustainability of taking intercontinental flights". [reader, he took the later plane to JFK].
This is not, I promise, one of those made up "and everyone on the train clapped" moments. The effect is perhaps to pull on the conscience of people who are already green-inclined but a little complacent.
And yet for the converse I have an archaeologist staying with me a couple of nights a week at the moment who lives in Kent but teaches at a local college in Lincolnshire. She is a vegan and very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil. She has nothing but scorn for these protestors, not least because she missed all the classes she was supposed to be teaching yesterday because of the M25 delays. As she said, if they are even turning her off the cause then she hates to think what they are doing to the wider public.
Maybe she's just revealing her true colours? If she's that anti-oil, regularly driving back and forth between Kent and Lincolnshire isn't exactly practising as she preaches. Edit: She sounds like an ex-colleague of mine who was oh-so-attuned to the feelings of Mother Earth while flying regularly to Bali to hear the preachings of her favourite guru.
Nope, everyone has to make a living. And until she can afford to find somewhere to live up her permanently it is either commute or unemployment. Again, real world stuff rather than the arrogant fantasy that you and Ishmael indulge in.
It also shows why "just stop oil" is a stupid mantra.
Its not possible, viable or desirable to "just stop oil".
What we need to do is transition away from oil, as much as possible (oil will still have chemical especially uses instead of being just burnt in the future).
If lobbyists wanted to talk about ways we could transition faster, ways to remove barriers from people replacing petrol cars with electric ones for instance, then that would be serious. Simply saying "just stop oil" though is grandiose, petulant gibberish that nobody will take seriously.
That's a conversation I used to have with myself, substituting "smoking" for "oil."
Then I just stopped smoking.
I mean you categorise my constant reposting of that acute, incisive, and wholly relevant daily mash article as: "Life is very, very pleasant here in Richistan, I don't see what the fuss is about."
Your views on Stop Oil could be construed equally as: "Rich old bloke who has enjoyed life and has plenty, some of which he is willing to forego, tries to kick away the stepladder from those on their way up."
Same for the Global North towards the Global South for that matter.
Well, yes, there are no good choices. I was just trying to articulate the case being made by JSO who to be fair to them probably are willing to forego the diesel trucks and intercontinental flights and stuff. There really is a valid case to be made that we ALL need to be subjecting ourselves to a great deal more inconvenience than the handful directly affected by the M25 closures are undergoing. Not saying it is right, but I am saying it deserves attention.
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
Violence would be a daft move because there are far more people willing and hoping to do violence to them than they could possibly imagine. All they are looking for is an excuse.
A few martyrs for the cause always works a treat.
‘This year’s Emily Wilding Davison medal goes to Jeremy X, beaten to death by ruddy faced commuters on the North Circular.’
I think you overstate the public opinion of them.
I would think the public was pretty pissed off with EW Davison what with endangering horses and riders and screwing up the race.
I doubt it. Bothering a few toffs following the gee gees doesn't compare with stopping people reaching medical appointments or missing flights and job interviews. You know, real life rather than fantasy.
Never seen a post more dripping with misplaced snobbery, horse racing had and has a massive following among those, you know, utterly awful working class chaps. Crowd of 500,000 at that Derby; stench must have been overpowering, what? And jockeys are and were working class chaps with no breeding at all working for derisory wages. And I can bloody promise you that falling from a galloping thoroughbred is not a fantasy experience.
Racing - lots of toffs and lots of oiks. Misses out the middle.
It's why the middle is so uncomfortable, as portrayed in that scything documentary from John Cleese and the Two Ronnies.
Dukes and dustmen rub along like a house on fire. It's the middle that is confused both "upwards" and "downwards". Not wishing to personalise it, but rather to give a real life example, it's why you are all over the place. By your own fantastic efforts you have been transported into the middle classes but are not entirely sure what (in particular socio-economic) attitudes you should adopt now that you're there.
I'll forgive the cliched, amateur hour psych.
Yes, shades of why "Boris" is liked by a chunk of the working class. Not the whole story, obvs, but I think it's in there.
That Cleese and the Ronnies thing was more a sketch than a "documentary" wasn't it? Unless I've only caught the famous bit and there's lots more.
You, me, all of us on here have access to the same information as Stop Oil. As the whole population.
It is not as though (cf smoking) there is a big conspiracy to portray climate change as anything other than a huge threat to mankind.
So why are people (you, me, (the whole population minus some greenies)) manifestly not altering our behaviour all that much. We need to jump in the car? We jump in the car. We need to fire up the computer to vanquish all on PB? We do that. We want to jet off to Ibitha or Thailand or Icelend? We do that also.
If we, the GBP, really wanted to reduce or fossil fuel consumption then we would do it. But we don't. Which does suggest we don't want to. Why? Is it a "Don't Look Up" scenario? Perhaps. Or perhaps people (cf Easter Island) are sailing, er motoring into oblivion.
But we don't want to change. And we are not changing. We do a bit, we recycle, we turn the light off as we walk out of the room, perhaps, but that's it. And tossers climbing up gantries on the M25 aren't likely to get us to change, odd moment of clarity on the way to LHR aside.
Firstly there are big campaigns to convince us global warming is a hoax. There front organisations have been cited here numerous times over the years.
Second, even Greta Thunberg acknowledges that there's a limited amount that individuals can do on their own. A lot of the necessary changes are changes of infrastructure, not personal consumer choice.
Secondly, when it comes to personal change, people rarely want to go out on a limb and appear weird by doing things differently. We saw this with the pandemic where usage of masks was low when it was only advised, but then increased when it was mandated. The assumption that most other people won't bother to change makes individuals feel that changing themselves is a waste of effort - unless the government forces everyone to comply.
We see a similar logic at play when people argue it's pointless for the UK to take action unless China does.
It seems to me that even the most committed tend to have weak intellectual spots. Some nice young people on R4 Today this morning, judgemental about things as only the young can be, suddenly got explicitly unjudgemental about people like them travelling in aeroplanes. Many make little mention of coal use elsewhere (try India, China, Poland) while wanting to attack a trivially small application to mine coal with specialist application in Cumbria.
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
Is that so unusual? In a modern 4-3-3, you have two wide forwards and one #9. In a modern 4-2-3-1, you have two inside forwards, a #10 and one #9. In an old fashioned 4-4-2, you have a #10 and... one #9. Back in Alan Shearer's day we would only have 2-3 outright strikers in a squad, same as today.
The rigid two up front, with little man / big man, has pretty much gone from modern football. Formations are much more fluid. It is becoming increasingly difficult even to say a team plays 4-3-3 etc.
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
I watched Kane last night in the Forest/Spurs League Cup game and he looked well tired - got took off at 60 mins
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
If 'ary gets injured, its going to be 11 men behind the ball, pray for penalties.
You really are the most miserable, pessimistic doom-monger when it comes to any English national team. It's pretty drab fare Francis.
I know! Not just him either. Lots like that. My whole adult life of 40 odd years we disappoint in the big football tourneys, then Southgate takes us to a WC semi and straight after that a Euro final where we're half the width of a goal post from lifting the trophy. It's a fantastic record. Can't believe the whinging. Utterly pathetic and if I had my way worthy of a swingeing ban from PB.
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
I watched Kane last night in the Forest/Spurs League Cup game and he looked well tired - got took off at 60 mins
Probably something to do with at Spurs for the past 5+ years he plays every game, full 90 mins, followed by the full 90 mins for every England game...rinse and repeat until he gets injured.
US inflation falling, pressure on sterling easing and equities all surging. Hopefully the BoE will benefit from this and our import inflation falls and we don't need to push rates above 5% as they hope.
House price crash off! Get on the ladder before a starter home anywhere except Great Yarmouth costs more than Twitter!
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
You won't get anything by voting because both parties are fully signed up to the environutters' damaging agenda...
No they aren't. We are doing staggeringly little compared to what we could do. In 1970 you could fly London New York return for $500. you still can, when that should have inflated to $5000. If it was me I'd slap a 100% surcharge on all flights to everywhere, just for starters.
But then I am an idiot who doesn't realise this is all a gigantic hoax to enable poor brown third world people to steal all your money.
Well, yes, we could destroy the economy immediately in the pursuit of an unattainable goal, rather than just doing it slowly. Doesn't make much difference in the end.
Translation: there's a lot of BP in my pension and I don't have any children to worry about.
I don't know about my pension in that detail, but I do know that wrecking our economy in pursuit of an unattainable goal isn't any good for our children or grandchildren.
Maybe I'm an incurable optimist or maybe I read too much science, but I hope you're wrong about saving the environment being unattainable. When the cheapest electricity production method is renewables we surely have some hope of reducing our CO2 output before we hit an irreversible tipping point such as one caused by the melting ice or thawing permafrost. Change when it happens can be positive and can happen quickly, in fact it usually does, google the 'S Curve' for details. Say what you like about Elon Musk, he can be an idiot, but he's set us onto the steep part of the S curve as far as electric cars are concerned and we are seeing massive reductions in cost of solar and wind. So, I'm an optimist, but we could do with our politicians waking up and doing more to make us energy independent, let alone doing our bit to save the planet. The young people of the US have turned out to save the States from the lunatic right, maybe they will help the UK at the next election.
"Saving the environment" isn't exactly unattainable, but it will need an element of evolution.
"Stopping climate change" is unattainable.
"Slowing climate change" is unattainable by unilateral action, and any action the UK could take is going to be outweighed by what other countries are doign unless they change.
Physics happens, at a certain point the permafrost will thaw and release such an amount of CO2 and methane that climate change will accelerate dramatically, what would that do to our economy? Getting to net zero and removing some CO2will eventually stop climate change. These things aren't unattainable. You may have heard of COP27, nobody should be talking about unilateral action. Other countries are making changes in the right direction, but they and we all need to do more and quickly. The UK is not the worst regarding Climate Change, but " "None of the countries achieved positions one to three. No country is doing enough to prevent dangerous climate change." https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/countries-doing-the-most-to-fight-climate-change
COP27 like all the previous COP's is an utter waste of time and no more than a free junket for a photo op for politicians. They make a token agreement then all go home and break it. Complete and utter waste of time while pumping ton's of CO2 into the atmosphere.
“Western security advisers are warning delegates at the COP27 climate summit not to download the host Egyptian government's official smartphone app, amid fears it could be used to hack their private emails, texts and even voice conversations.”
Any Government official stupid enough to arrive at an international summit and download the host’s “official app” should be sacked on the spot.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
If 'ary gets injured, its going to be 11 men behind the ball, pray for penalties.
You really are the most miserable, pessimistic doom-monger when it comes to any English national team. It's pretty drab fare Francis.
Have you watched them play, its miserable, drab fare.....
Also, was I right, or was I right about the Euros? I explained at the time they were playing a very negative cautious style and why. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same again at the WC, for the same reasons as the Euros. Maguire will have to play, who isn't fast enough (and has no form), and the rest of the defence will be patched up. Southgate doesn't trust Rice to play the way he does for West Ham, so he will sit in, and combine him with Henderson (or a Bellingham with again a much more cautious role) to again shield the defence.
So it will be left for one of Foden / Sterling / Saka to try and create some magic to feed Kane.
We were two penalty kicks away from winning the Euros.
Why can't Just Stop Oil be pleased about the fact that more than half of UK energy is regularly produced by renewables? Just a few years ago it was a very small percentage.
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
You won't get anything by voting because both parties are fully signed up to the environutters' damaging agenda...
No they aren't. We are doing staggeringly little compared to what we could do. In 1970 you could fly London New York return for $500. you still can, when that should have inflated to $5000. If it was me I'd slap a 100% surcharge on all flights to everywhere, just for starters.
But then I am an idiot who doesn't realise this is all a gigantic hoax to enable poor brown third world people to steal all your money.
Well, yes, we could destroy the economy immediately in the pursuit of an unattainable goal, rather than just doing it slowly. Doesn't make much difference in the end.
Translation: there's a lot of BP in my pension and I don't have any children to worry about.
I don't know about my pension in that detail, but I do know that wrecking our economy in pursuit of an unattainable goal isn't any good for our children or grandchildren.
Maybe I'm an incurable optimist or maybe I read too much science, but I hope you're wrong about saving the environment being unattainable. When the cheapest electricity production method is renewables we surely have some hope of reducing our CO2 output before we hit an irreversible tipping point such as one caused by the melting ice or thawing permafrost. Change when it happens can be positive and can happen quickly, in fact it usually does, google the 'S Curve' for details. Say what you like about Elon Musk, he can be an idiot, but he's set us onto the steep part of the S curve as far as electric cars are concerned and we are seeing massive reductions in cost of solar and wind. So, I'm an optimist, but we could do with our politicians waking up and doing more to make us energy independent, let alone doing our bit to save the planet. The young people of the US have turned out to save the States from the lunatic right, maybe they will help the UK at the next election.
"Saving the environment" isn't exactly unattainable, but it will need an element of evolution.
"Stopping climate change" is unattainable.
"Slowing climate change" is unattainable by unilateral action, and any action the UK could take is going to be outweighed by what other countries are doign unless they change.
Physics happens, at a certain point the permafrost will thaw and release such an amount of CO2 and methane that climate change will accelerate dramatically, what would that do to our economy? Getting to net zero and removing some CO2will eventually stop climate change. These things aren't unattainable. You may have heard of COP27, nobody should be talking about unilateral action. Other countries are making changes in the right direction, but they and we all need to do more and quickly. The UK is not the worst regarding Climate Change, but " "None of the countries achieved positions one to three. No country is doing enough to prevent dangerous climate change." https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/countries-doing-the-most-to-fight-climate-change
COP27 like all the previous COP's is an utter waste of time and no more than a free junket for a photo op for politicians. They make a token agreement then all go home and break it. Complete and utter waste of time while pumping ton's of CO2 into the atmosphere.
“Western security advisers are warning delegates at the COP27 climate summit not to download the host Egyptian government's official smartphone app, amid fears it could be used to hack their private emails, texts and even voice conversations.”
Any Government official stupid enough to arrive at an international summit and download the host’s “official app” should be sacked on the spot.
Oh, I can imagine a handful are downloading it onto a 'spare' phone, so it can be given to experts to see what unexpected goodies it has on it.
You, me, all of us on here have access to the same information as Stop Oil. As the whole population.
It is not as though (cf smoking) there is a big conspiracy to portray climate change as anything other than a huge threat to mankind.
So why are people (you, me, (the whole population minus some greenies)) manifestly not altering our behaviour all that much. We need to jump in the car? We jump in the car. We need to fire up the computer to vanquish all on PB? We do that. We want to jet off to Ibitha or Thailand or Icelend? We do that also.
If we, the GBP, really wanted to reduce or fossil fuel consumption then we would do it. But we don't. Which does suggest we don't want to. Why? Is it a "Don't Look Up" scenario? Perhaps. Or perhaps people (cf Easter Island) are sailing, er motoring into oblivion.
But we don't want to change. And we are not changing. We do a bit, we recycle, we turn the light off as we walk out of the room, perhaps, but that's it. And tossers climbing up gantries on the M25 aren't likely to get us to change, odd moment of clarity on the way to LHR aside.
Firstly there are big campaigns to convince us global warming is a hoax. There front organisations have been cited here numerous times over the years.
Second, even Greta Thunberg acknowledges that there's a limited amount that individuals can do on their own. A lot of the necessary changes are changes of infrastructure, not personal consumer choice.
Secondly, when it comes to personal change, people rarely want to go out on a limb and appear weird by doing things differently. We saw this with the pandemic where usage of masks was low when it was only advised, but then increased when it was mandated. The assumption that most other people won't bother to change makes individuals feel that changing themselves is a waste of effort - unless the government forces everyone to comply.
We see a similar logic at play when people argue it's pointless for the UK to take action unless China does.
Those campaigns are far from the MSM and it is the MSM where the vast majority of people hang out.
Not true. For many years those campaigns for themselves masses of BBC airtime in the name of balance, and they still have a strong influence on naysayers among Tory MPs.
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
If 'ary gets injured, its going to be 11 men behind the ball, pray for penalties.
You really are the most miserable, pessimistic doom-monger when it comes to any English national team. It's pretty drab fare Francis.
Have you watched them play, its miserable, drab fare.....
Also, was I right, or was I right about the Euros? I explained at the time they were playing a very negative cautious style and why. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same again at the WC, for the same reasons as the Euros. Maguire will have to play, who isn't fast enough (and has no form), and the rest of the defence will be patched up. Southgate doesn't trust Rice to play the way he does for West Ham, so he will sit in, and combine him with Henderson (or a Bellingham with again a much more cautious role) to again shield the defence.
So it will be left for one of Foden / Sterling / Saka to try and create some magic to feed Kane.
We were two penalty kicks away from winning the Euros.
I said at the time it was very effective against European teams who weren't at their best e.g. Germany were piss poor team, and an England team who were in a tricky situation in terms of Foden, Bellingham, Saka, first big tournament, and had very limited options in terms of defenders / central midfielders.
More recently the same approach has been found severely wanting. And all those talented players have made massive progress for their clubs, have regressed playing in England continued negative style.
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
If 'ary gets injured, its going to be 11 men behind the ball, pray for penalties.
All I want from this world cup is to not lose to the Welsh.
Boycott Qatar!
The problem is if football wants to be a global game it has to go everywhere to find World Cup hosts, including nations that are not western and not liberal. Now it might have made more sense to hold it in Egypt or Saudi Arabia or Iran than Qatar size wise but the Middle Eastern nations all have football teams that compete in World Cups at some level, whether qualifiers or the finals and at some stage one of them would host it
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Yep — it'll probably be 50 GOP, 49 Dem going into the Georgia run-off.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Thank you.
I think it’s now Candidate(s) % Votes
Kelly Incumbent 51.4% 979,509 95,318 ahead
Masters 46.4% 884,191 Est. vote in: 76%
Laxalt 49.4% 436,854 15,812 ahead
Cortez Masto Incumbent 47.6% 421,042 Est. vote in: 84%
I agree with you, Kelly and Laxalt win here (nice win bet for me on Laxalt)
A 50/50 senate, one pick up each, provided Warnock wins in playoff.
None of us has it 100% Warnock wins, but I really not sure the votes are there for him this time. The GOP can still take senate I call a value bet worth considering today.
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
If 'ary gets injured, its going to be 11 men behind the ball, pray for penalties.
You really are the most miserable, pessimistic doom-monger when it comes to any English national team. It's pretty drab fare Francis.
Have you watched them play, its miserable, drab fare.....
Also, was I right, or was I right about the Euros? I explained at the time they were playing a very negative cautious style and why. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same again at the WC, for the same reasons as the Euros. Maguire will have to play, who isn't fast enough (and has no form), and the rest of the defence will be patched up. Southgate doesn't trust Rice to play the way he does for West Ham, so he will sit in, and combine him with Henderson (or a Bellingham with again a much more cautious role) to again shield the defence.
So it will be left for one of Foden / Sterling / Saka to try and create some magic to feed Kane.
We were two penalty kicks away from winning the Euros.
I said at the time it was very effective against European teams who weren't at their best e.g. Germany were piss poor team. More recently the same approach has been found wanting.
You asked me whether you were "right" about the Euros. Unless you predicted that England would be runners-up on penalties (which you didn't), you were wrong about the Euros. Very wrong indeed.
Just as you were wrong when you told everyone that England were going to be knocked out by Sri Lanka in the cricket.
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
You won't get anything by voting because both parties are fully signed up to the environutters' damaging agenda...
No they aren't. We are doing staggeringly little compared to what we could do. In 1970 you could fly London New York return for $500. you still can, when that should have inflated to $5000. If it was me I'd slap a 100% surcharge on all flights to everywhere, just for starters.
But then I am an idiot who doesn't realise this is all a gigantic hoax to enable poor brown third world people to steal all your money.
Well, yes, we could destroy the economy immediately in the pursuit of an unattainable goal, rather than just doing it slowly. Doesn't make much difference in the end.
Translation: there's a lot of BP in my pension and I don't have any children to worry about.
I don't know about my pension in that detail, but I do know that wrecking our economy in pursuit of an unattainable goal isn't any good for our children or grandchildren.
Maybe I'm an incurable optimist or maybe I read too much science, but I hope you're wrong about saving the environment being unattainable. When the cheapest electricity production method is renewables we surely have some hope of reducing our CO2 output before we hit an irreversible tipping point such as one caused by the melting ice or thawing permafrost. Change when it happens can be positive and can happen quickly, in fact it usually does, google the 'S Curve' for details. Say what you like about Elon Musk, he can be an idiot, but he's set us onto the steep part of the S curve as far as electric cars are concerned and we are seeing massive reductions in cost of solar and wind. So, I'm an optimist, but we could do with our politicians waking up and doing more to make us energy independent, let alone doing our bit to save the planet. The young people of the US have turned out to save the States from the lunatic right, maybe they will help the UK at the next election.
"Saving the environment" isn't exactly unattainable, but it will need an element of evolution.
"Stopping climate change" is unattainable.
"Slowing climate change" is unattainable by unilateral action, and any action the UK could take is going to be outweighed by what other countries are doign unless they change.
Physics happens, at a certain point the permafrost will thaw and release such an amount of CO2 and methane that climate change will accelerate dramatically, what would that do to our economy? Getting to net zero and removing some CO2will eventually stop climate change. These things aren't unattainable. You may have heard of COP27, nobody should be talking about unilateral action. Other countries are making changes in the right direction, but they and we all need to do more and quickly. The UK is not the worst regarding Climate Change, but " "None of the countries achieved positions one to three. No country is doing enough to prevent dangerous climate change." https://www.cntraveler.com/gallery/countries-doing-the-most-to-fight-climate-change
COP27 like all the previous COP's is an utter waste of time and no more than a free junket for a photo op for politicians. They make a token agreement then all go home and break it. Complete and utter waste of time while pumping ton's of CO2 into the atmosphere.
“Western security advisers are warning delegates at the COP27 climate summit not to download the host Egyptian government's official smartphone app, amid fears it could be used to hack their private emails, texts and even voice conversations.”
Any Government official stupid enough to arrive at an international summit and download the host’s “official app” should be sacked on the spot.
Oh, I can imagine a handful are downloading it onto a 'spare' phone, so it can be given to experts to see what unexpected goodies it has on it.
We likely know about it because James Bond was there last week, with his American and Israeli friends, taking a good look around.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Yep — it'll probably be 50 GOP, 49 Dem going into the Georgia run-off.
With the Democrats having won most votes of the 2 run off candidates
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
If 'ary gets injured, its going to be 11 men behind the ball, pray for penalties.
You really are the most miserable, pessimistic doom-monger when it comes to any English national team. It's pretty drab fare Francis.
Have you watched them play, its miserable, drab fare.....
Also, was I right, or was I right about the Euros? I explained at the time they were playing a very negative cautious style and why. I wouldn't be surprised to see the same again at the WC, for the same reasons as the Euros. Maguire will have to play, who isn't fast enough (and has no form), and the rest of the defence will be patched up. Southgate doesn't trust Rice to play the way he does for West Ham, so he will sit in, and combine him with Henderson (or a Bellingham with again a much more cautious role) to again shield the defence.
So it will be left for one of Foden / Sterling / Saka to try and create some magic to feed Kane.
We were two penalty kicks away from winning the Euros.
I said at the time it was very effective against European teams who weren't at their best e.g. Germany were piss poor team. More recently the same approach has been found wanting.
You asked me whether you were "right" about the Euros. Unless you predicted that England would be runners-up on penalties (which you didn't), you were wrong about the Euros. Very wrong indeed.
Just as you were wrong when you told everyone that England were going to be knocked out by Sri Lanka in the cricket.
You have a weird bias for pessimism.
The cricket was a joke.....you know the long PB joke in regards to the cricket about stating the opposite.
The football, as far as I remember, I never said England would lose any of the games. I simply said they had a very negative style, but explained exactly what the thinking was....but that after the Euros they needed to develop beyond that if they want to be a top team in the world...they haven't, they have gone backwards as other countries have worked out the very 1-d negative style.
In comparison, I think England T20 setup is way ahead of the pack...and I have said this repeatedly. I have talked about the level of analytics and detail that goes on. In terms of the analysis they do, only select IPL teams are doing the same sort of stuff. Australia etc are in the dark ages.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Masto by 10k
You can get 12 for Laxalt so if it really is going to the wire that's a must do, I'd have thought?
You, me, all of us on here have access to the same information as Stop Oil. As the whole population.
It is not as though (cf smoking) there is a big conspiracy to portray climate change as anything other than a huge threat to mankind.
So why are people (you, me, (the whole population minus some greenies)) manifestly not altering our behaviour all that much. We need to jump in the car? We jump in the car. We need to fire up the computer to vanquish all on PB? We do that. We want to jet off to Ibitha or Thailand or Icelend? We do that also.
If we, the GBP, really wanted to reduce or fossil fuel consumption then we would do it. But we don't. Which does suggest we don't want to. Why? Is it a "Don't Look Up" scenario? Perhaps. Or perhaps people (cf Easter Island) are sailing, er motoring into oblivion.
But we don't want to change. And we are not changing. We do a bit, we recycle, we turn the light off as we walk out of the room, perhaps, but that's it. And tossers climbing up gantries on the M25 aren't likely to get us to change, odd moment of clarity on the way to LHR aside.
Firstly there are big campaigns to convince us global warming is a hoax. There front organisations have been cited here numerous times over the years.
Second, even Greta Thunberg acknowledges that there's a limited amount that individuals can do on their own. A lot of the necessary changes are changes of infrastructure, not personal consumer choice.
Secondly, when it comes to personal change, people rarely want to go out on a limb and appear weird by doing things differently. We saw this with the pandemic where usage of masks was low when it was only advised, but then increased when it was mandated. The assumption that most other people won't bother to change makes individuals feel that changing themselves is a waste of effort - unless the government forces everyone to comply.
We see a similar logic at play when people argue it's pointless for the UK to take action unless China does.
It seems to me that even the most committed tend to have weak intellectual spots. Some nice young people on R4 Today this morning, judgemental about things as only the young can be, suddenly got explicitly unjudgemental about people like them travelling in aeroplanes. Many make little mention of coal use elsewhere (try India, China, Poland) while wanting to attack a trivially small application to mine coal with specialist application in Cumbria.
One of the advantages of democracy as a system of government is that it doesn't rely on any one individual being 100% pure and true. It's a collective system where the institutions can survive and thrive even though the people working in them are flawed, as everyone is.
Hypocrisy is the very worst transgression in British politics, but it's unrealistic to expect advocates for a cause to be paragons of virtue themselves. If it were that simple we'd hardly have any problems at all.
Expecting those advocating for change to be perfect exemplars of that change is an attitude designed to encourage cynicism, and benefits only those for whom the status quo is perfectly fine.
(1) Somebody knows something about the ballots that are still to come. (Not implausible.) (2) Someone is very foolishly betting based on the NYTimes and other suggesting that Cortez Masto is likely to win. (Quite possible.) (3) Someone is hedging an existing Senate control bet and it's a very illiquid market, so some small bets moved the price a long way. (Unlikely.)
I tend to trust my judgement. But you should always listen to the market. I'm moving my assessment to a narrow Cortez Masto victory.
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
Violence would be a daft move because there are far more people willing and hoping to do violence to them than they could possibly imagine. All they are looking for is an excuse.
A few martyrs for the cause always works a treat.
‘This year’s Emily Wilding Davison medal goes to Jeremy X, beaten to death by ruddy faced commuters on the North Circular.’
I think you overstate the public opinion of them.
I would think the public was pretty pissed off with EW Davison what with endangering horses and riders and screwing up the race.
I doubt it. Bothering a few toffs following the gee gees doesn't compare with stopping people reaching medical appointments or missing flights and job interviews. You know, real life rather than fantasy.
My colleague missed a flight to New York yesterday because of the protest - in the taxi for 5 hours! (I got the flight as I was taking a different route).
Interestingly though he seemed to be most irritated by the over talkative taxi driver who didn't shut up for the whole journey, and he reflected that "maybe someone's trying to tell me something about the sustainability of taking intercontinental flights". [reader, he took the later plane to JFK].
This is not, I promise, one of those made up "and everyone on the train clapped" moments. The effect is perhaps to pull on the conscience of people who are already green-inclined but a little complacent.
And yet for the converse I have an archaeologist staying with me a couple of nights a week at the moment who lives in Kent but teaches at a local college in Lincolnshire. She is a vegan and very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil. She has nothing but scorn for these protestors, not least because she missed all the classes she was supposed to be teaching yesterday because of the M25 delays. As she said, if they are even turning her off the cause then she hates to think what they are doing to the wider public.
Maybe she's just revealing her true colours? If she's that anti-oil, regularly driving back and forth between Kent and Lincolnshire isn't exactly practising as she preaches. Edit: She sounds like an ex-colleague of mine who was oh-so-attuned to the feelings of Mother Earth while flying regularly to Bali to hear the preachings of her favourite guru.
Nope, everyone has to make a living. And until she can afford to find somewhere to live up here permanently it is either commute or unemployment. Again, real world stuff rather than the arrogant fantasy that you and Ishmael indulge in.
Arrogant fantasy? All I was doing was pointing out the obvious inconsistency of your colleague's words and deeds. If she were really "very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil" then she would make an effort to organise her life accordingly. An integral part of being very strongly green is an acceptance that you may have to inconvenience yourself for the greater good of the planet. She doesn't sound very green at all to me.
I don't know about your circumstances. Maybe you are one of the very few people who is fortunate enough to be able to do so, but most people are not able to just 'organise their lives' in the way you claim. She makes single roundtrip journey from Kent to Lincolnshire once a week for her job and probably travels not many more miles doing so than someone commuting into London 5 times a week from the home counties. Should they impoverish themselves as well to suit your view of what is right and wrong.
I would also point out that you are currently using a computer made of oil, utilising electricity probably derived from hydrocarbons via a network and ISP server predominantly made of oil, all for your own amusement, to criticise someone trying to get to a job earn a living and having to burn oil to do so. There is more than a tiny degree of hypocrisy in your position. And the same goes for our ex smoking friend Ishmael.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Yep — it'll probably be 50 GOP, 49 Dem going into the Georgia run-off.
With the Democrats having won most votes of the 2 run off candidates
I don’t fancy Warnock in how that state has voted in this election. A better candidate against him, he would have lost already.
If this playoff is not about Warmnocks opponent this time, but about Dem Party hubris as the economy crisis bites voters, Warnock loses imo.
You, me, all of us on here have access to the same information as Stop Oil. As the whole population.
It is not as though (cf smoking) there is a big conspiracy to portray climate change as anything other than a huge threat to mankind.
So why are people (you, me, (the whole population minus some greenies)) manifestly not altering our behaviour all that much. We need to jump in the car? We jump in the car. We need to fire up the computer to vanquish all on PB? We do that. We want to jet off to Ibitha or Thailand or Icelend? We do that also.
If we, the GBP, really wanted to reduce or fossil fuel consumption then we would do it. But we don't. Which does suggest we don't want to. Why? Is it a "Don't Look Up" scenario? Perhaps. Or perhaps people (cf Easter Island) are sailing, er motoring into oblivion.
But we don't want to change. And we are not changing. We do a bit, we recycle, we turn the light off as we walk out of the room, perhaps, but that's it. And tossers climbing up gantries on the M25 aren't likely to get us to change, odd moment of clarity on the way to LHR aside.
Firstly there are big campaigns to convince us global warming is a hoax. There front organisations have been cited here numerous times over the years.
Second, even Greta Thunberg acknowledges that there's a limited amount that individuals can do on their own. A lot of the necessary changes are changes of infrastructure, not personal consumer choice.
Secondly, when it comes to personal change, people rarely want to go out on a limb and appear weird by doing things differently. We saw this with the pandemic where usage of masks was low when it was only advised, but then increased when it was mandated. The assumption that most other people won't bother to change makes individuals feel that changing themselves is a waste of effort - unless the government forces everyone to comply.
We see a similar logic at play when people argue it's pointless for the UK to take action unless China does.
Those campaigns are far from the MSM and it is the MSM where the vast majority of people hang out.
Not true. For many years those campaigns for themselves masses of BBC airtime in the name of balance, and they still have a strong influence on naysayers among Tory MPs.
The BBC doesn't show any "balance" any more. It is full on climate change is happening and it is dangerous. Check out their website. Gone are the days of Lawson appearing on QT.
The fast food chain sent an app alert on Wednesday, saying: "It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
You, me, all of us on here have access to the same information as Stop Oil. As the whole population.
It is not as though (cf smoking) there is a big conspiracy to portray climate change as anything other than a huge threat to mankind.
So why are people (you, me, (the whole population minus some greenies)) manifestly not altering our behaviour all that much. We need to jump in the car? We jump in the car. We need to fire up the computer to vanquish all on PB? We do that. We want to jet off to Ibitha or Thailand or Icelend? We do that also.
If we, the GBP, really wanted to reduce or fossil fuel consumption then we would do it. But we don't. Which does suggest we don't want to. Why? Is it a "Don't Look Up" scenario? Perhaps. Or perhaps people (cf Easter Island) are sailing, er motoring into oblivion.
But we don't want to change. And we are not changing. We do a bit, we recycle, we turn the light off as we walk out of the room, perhaps, but that's it. And tossers climbing up gantries on the M25 aren't likely to get us to change, odd moment of clarity on the way to LHR aside.
Firstly there are big campaigns to convince us global warming is a hoax. There front organisations have been cited here numerous times over the years.
Second, even Greta Thunberg acknowledges that there's a limited amount that individuals can do on their own. A lot of the necessary changes are changes of infrastructure, not personal consumer choice.
Secondly, when it comes to personal change, people rarely want to go out on a limb and appear weird by doing things differently. We saw this with the pandemic where usage of masks was low when it was only advised, but then increased when it was mandated. The assumption that most other people won't bother to change makes individuals feel that changing themselves is a waste of effort - unless the government forces everyone to comply.
We see a similar logic at play when people argue it's pointless for the UK to take action unless China does.
It seems to me that even the most committed tend to have weak intellectual spots. Some nice young people on R4 Today this morning, judgemental about things as only the young can be, suddenly got explicitly unjudgemental about people like them travelling in aeroplanes. Many make little mention of coal use elsewhere (try India, China, Poland) while wanting to attack a trivially small application to mine coal with specialist application in Cumbria.
But you focus on what's close to home, that's understandable. You can impact it more and it's ... close.
It'd be an odd protest movement who opted for the technique of sitting around having balanced 'big picture' discussions overflowing with context and perspective.
And tbh I often suspect that those keen to steer things that way are actually saying, "oh ffs, do stop banging on, can't you see I'm reading the paper."
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
Violence would be a daft move because there are far more people willing and hoping to do violence to them than they could possibly imagine. All they are looking for is an excuse.
A few martyrs for the cause always works a treat.
‘This year’s Emily Wilding Davison medal goes to Jeremy X, beaten to death by ruddy faced commuters on the North Circular.’
I think you overstate the public opinion of them.
I would think the public was pretty pissed off with EW Davison what with endangering horses and riders and screwing up the race.
I doubt it. Bothering a few toffs following the gee gees doesn't compare with stopping people reaching medical appointments or missing flights and job interviews. You know, real life rather than fantasy.
My colleague missed a flight to New York yesterday because of the protest - in the taxi for 5 hours! (I got the flight as I was taking a different route).
Interestingly though he seemed to be most irritated by the over talkative taxi driver who didn't shut up for the whole journey, and he reflected that "maybe someone's trying to tell me something about the sustainability of taking intercontinental flights". [reader, he took the later plane to JFK].
This is not, I promise, one of those made up "and everyone on the train clapped" moments. The effect is perhaps to pull on the conscience of people who are already green-inclined but a little complacent.
And yet for the converse I have an archaeologist staying with me a couple of nights a week at the moment who lives in Kent but teaches at a local college in Lincolnshire. She is a vegan and very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil. She has nothing but scorn for these protestors, not least because she missed all the classes she was supposed to be teaching yesterday because of the M25 delays. As she said, if they are even turning her off the cause then she hates to think what they are doing to the wider public.
Maybe she's just revealing her true colours? If she's that anti-oil, regularly driving back and forth between Kent and Lincolnshire isn't exactly practising as she preaches. Edit: She sounds like an ex-colleague of mine who was oh-so-attuned to the feelings of Mother Earth while flying regularly to Bali to hear the preachings of her favourite guru.
Nope, everyone has to make a living. And until she can afford to find somewhere to live up here permanently it is either commute or unemployment. Again, real world stuff rather than the arrogant fantasy that you and Ishmael indulge in.
Arrogant fantasy? All I was doing was pointing out the obvious inconsistency of your colleague's words and deeds. If she were really "very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil" then she would make an effort to organise her life accordingly. An integral part of being very strongly green is an acceptance that you may have to inconvenience yourself for the greater good of the planet. She doesn't sound very green at all to me.
I don't know about your circumstances. Maybe you are one of the very few people who is fortunate enough to be able to do so, but most people are not able to just 'organise their lives' in the way you claim. She makes single roundtrip journey from Kent to Lincolnshire once a week for her job and probably travels not many more miles doing so than someone commuting into London 5 times a week from the home counties. Should they impoverish themselves as well to suit your view of what is right and wrong.
I would also point out that you are currently using a computer made of oil, utilising electricity probably derived from hydrocarbons via a network and ISP server predominantly made of oil, all for your own amusement, to criticise someone trying to get to a job earn a living and having to burn oil to do so. There is more than a tiny degree of hypocrisy in your position. And the same goes for our ex smoking friend Ishmael.
I have not stated a position, just pointed out the one adopted by JSO. I have just made arrangements to fly on oil powered planes to and back from Edinburgh, Nairobi, Panama City, Tahiti and Auckland in the next 18 months.
(1) Somebody knows something about the ballots that are still to come. (Not implausible.) (2) Someone is very foolishly betting based on the NYTimes and other suggesting that Cortez Masto is likely to win. (Quite possible.) (3) Someone is hedging an existing Senate control bet and it's a very illiquid market, so some small bets moved the price a long way. (Unlikely.)
I tend to trust my judgement. But you should always listen to the market. I'm moving my assessment to a narrow Cortez Masto victory.
My method, Which results in betting against you here, is looking at the most recent polls from trusted pollsters before voting. Overall That points to her loss.
That would be already knowing the opinion of some of the people in the stacks of votes not counted, other than second guessing it based on historical voting from that area?
I’d we can all agree that a credible target for climate change is 2% and not the impossible 1.5% then I’d argue we have more or less cracked it. The west moving to electric cars will force the world to do the same and the economics are pushing renewables and nuclear. China and India have woken up and taken an interest and, basically, technology and progress will once again save the day. That’s not even allowing for any clever “Hail Mary” technology solutions to extract what is already in the atmosphere in a few decades.
At 2% or 2.5% some countries will really suffer and we should support them and relocate those who lose their islands; but the U.K. is basically just going to gain a wine industry and more fertile farm land.
You're aware that the larger problem is agricultural systems? I'm not a vegetarian, but it's hard to ignore the fact that agriculture (specifically meat production, largely because of dependence on imported grain/soya for intensive farms) causes more climate change emissions than all transport (cars, trains, planes, ships) combined. Quite a lot is being done on transport and forms of energy production. Agriculture is still moving in the wrong direction..
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
Violence would be a daft move because there are far more people willing and hoping to do violence to them than they could possibly imagine. All they are looking for is an excuse.
A few martyrs for the cause always works a treat.
‘This year’s Emily Wilding Davison medal goes to Jeremy X, beaten to death by ruddy faced commuters on the North Circular.’
I think you overstate the public opinion of them.
I would think the public was pretty pissed off with EW Davison what with endangering horses and riders and screwing up the race.
I doubt it. Bothering a few toffs following the gee gees doesn't compare with stopping people reaching medical appointments or missing flights and job interviews. You know, real life rather than fantasy.
My colleague missed a flight to New York yesterday because of the protest - in the taxi for 5 hours! (I got the flight as I was taking a different route).
Interestingly though he seemed to be most irritated by the over talkative taxi driver who didn't shut up for the whole journey, and he reflected that "maybe someone's trying to tell me something about the sustainability of taking intercontinental flights". [reader, he took the later plane to JFK].
This is not, I promise, one of those made up "and everyone on the train clapped" moments. The effect is perhaps to pull on the conscience of people who are already green-inclined but a little complacent.
And yet for the converse I have an archaeologist staying with me a couple of nights a week at the moment who lives in Kent but teaches at a local college in Lincolnshire. She is a vegan and very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil. She has nothing but scorn for these protestors, not least because she missed all the classes she was supposed to be teaching yesterday because of the M25 delays. As she said, if they are even turning her off the cause then she hates to think what they are doing to the wider public.
Maybe she's just revealing her true colours? If she's that anti-oil, regularly driving back and forth between Kent and Lincolnshire isn't exactly practising as she preaches. Edit: She sounds like an ex-colleague of mine who was oh-so-attuned to the feelings of Mother Earth while flying regularly to Bali to hear the preachings of her favourite guru.
Nope, everyone has to make a living. And until she can afford to find somewhere to live up here permanently it is either commute or unemployment. Again, real world stuff rather than the arrogant fantasy that you and Ishmael indulge in.
Arrogant fantasy? All I was doing was pointing out the obvious inconsistency of your colleague's words and deeds. If she were really "very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil" then she would make an effort to organise her life accordingly. An integral part of being very strongly green is an acceptance that you may have to inconvenience yourself for the greater good of the planet. She doesn't sound very green at all to me.
I don't know about your circumstances. Maybe you are one of the very few people who is fortunate enough to be able to do so, but most people are not able to just 'organise their lives' in the way you claim. She makes single roundtrip journey from Kent to Lincolnshire once a week for her job and probably travels not many more miles doing so than someone commuting into London 5 times a week from the home counties. Should they impoverish themselves as well to suit your view of what is right and wrong.
I would also point out that you are currently using a computer made of oil, utilising electricity probably derived from hydrocarbons via a network and ISP server predominantly made of oil, all for your own amusement, to criticise someone trying to get to a job earn a living and having to burn oil to do so. There is more than a tiny degree of hypocrisy in your position. And the same goes for our ex smoking friend Ishmael.
No need to be so defensive Richard. It is an interesting example simply because she professes herself to be green-minded and yet at the intersection between being green-minded and real life then inevitably green-minded loses out.
As with 99.997% of the rest of the population.
It is just the very obvious point that protesters up a gantry aren't going to stop people doing what they believe they should or need or want to do.
Rosehill with Burnley Wood, Burnley Council, C defence: C, L, LD, G Greasley, Broxtowe Council, C defence: C, L, LD Bourne East, South Kesteven Council, C defence:C, L, LD, G, I Grantham St Wulfram’s, South Kesteven Council, C defence:C, L, G, I Cannock West, Cannock Chase Council, C defence:C, L, G Braintree South, Braintree Council, C(I) defence:C, L, G Coggeshall, Braintree Council, I defence:C, L, I Green Lane and St James, Kingston upon Thames Council, LD defence:C, L, LD, Kingston Ind Residents Newton Poppleford and Harpford, East Devon Council, Ind East Devon Alliance defence:C, L, I
@OldKingCole has provided local insight earlier into Coggeshall.
The fast food chain sent an app alert on Wednesday, saying: "It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
I’d we can all agree that a credible target for climate change is 2% and not the impossible 1.5% then I’d argue we have more or less cracked it. The west moving to electric cars will force the world to do the same and the economics are pushing renewables and nuclear. China and India have woken up and taken an interest and, basically, technology and progress will once again save the day. That’s not even allowing for any clever “Hail Mary” technology solutions to extract what is already in the atmosphere in a few decades.
At 2% or 2.5% some countries will really suffer and we should support them and relocate those who lose their islands; but the U.K. is basically just going to gain a wine industry and more fertile farm land.
You're aware that the larger problem is agricultural systems? I'm not a vegetarian, but it's hard to ignore the fact that agriculture (specifically meat production, largely because of dependence on imported grain/soya for intensive farms) causes more climate change emissions than all transport (cars, trains, planes, ships) combined. Quite a lot is being done on transport and forms of energy production. Agriculture is still moving in the wrong direction..
It is also quite striking how unequal carbon footprints are within countries. @Leon probably has as much CO2 production as the rest of PB combined.
(1) Somebody knows something about the ballots that are still to come. (Not implausible.) (2) Someone is very foolishly betting based on the NYTimes and other suggesting that Cortez Masto is likely to win. (Quite possible.) (3) Someone is hedging an existing Senate control bet and it's a very illiquid market, so some small bets moved the price a long way. (Unlikely.)
I tend to trust my judgement. But you should always listen to the market. I'm moving my assessment to a narrow Cortez Masto victory.
My method, Which results in betting against you here, is looking at the most recent polls from trusted pollsters before voting. Overall That points to her loss.
That would be already knowing the opinion of some of the people in the stacks of votes not counted, other than second guessing it based on historical voting from that area?
Ralston is looking at actual mail in ballots already counted in this election and extrapolating to the mail in ballots still to be counted.
(1) Somebody knows something about the ballots that are still to come. (Not implausible.) (2) Someone is very foolishly betting based on the NYTimes and other suggesting that Cortez Masto is likely to win. (Quite possible.) (3) Someone is hedging an existing Senate control bet and it's a very illiquid market, so some small bets moved the price a long way. (Unlikely.)
I tend to trust my judgement. But you should always listen to the market. I'm moving my assessment to a narrow Cortez Masto victory.
My method, Which results in betting against you here, is looking at the most recent polls from trusted pollsters before voting. Overall That points to her loss.
That would be already knowing the opinion of some of the people in the stacks of votes not counted, other than second guessing it based on historical voting from that area?
The trouble is that Nevada polls almost always under state the Democratic candidate.
It is the reverse of the Shy Trump problem. They can't find enough poor Latinos who the unioms turnout to vote Dem.
The fast food chain sent an app alert on Wednesday, saying: "It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
Just WOW!!!!
Wowsers.
This is why AI should not be trusted to send out material automatically. Prepare it maybe, but have a human say yes or no. Ouch.
The fast food chain sent an app alert on Wednesday, saying: "It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
Golly. Absolutely wow.
ETA chicken and cheese is non kosher, in case you think it couldn't get worse.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Yep — it'll probably be 50 GOP, 49 Dem going into the Georgia run-off.
With the Democrats having won most votes of the 2 run off candidates
I don’t fancy Warnock in how that state has voted in this election. A better candidate against him, he would have lost already.
If this playoff is not about Warmnocks opponent this time, but about Dem Party hubris as the economy crisis bites voters, Warnock loses imo.
Warnock only needs 0.7% more of the Georgia vote to get to 50.1% and win the runoff.
In January 2021 Ossoff for instance picked up 2.7% more votes in the runoff than he won in the first round to win the seat for the Democrats.
Though to be honest even if the GOP do win it to get to 51 (if they also hold their lead in Nevada) it would still be well short of the gains they wanted and leave Mitt Romney effectively with the casting vote, who Biden could certainly do deals with on foreign treaties, SC justices appointments etc where Senate control is most relevant
Large numbers of villages reportedly falling to the Ukrainian forces in Kherson now.
Russian morale must be rock bottom. They were told this was now Russia they were defending. Now they are scurrying towards Crimea as fast as they can, after the loss of thousands of dead and injured - for what?
Tue only question in Nevada is "How much rural vote is left to count"
If there is a bunch then it is on like Donley Kong. However looking at historical results my estimation isn that the vast remainder of outstanding vote is in Washoe and Clark.
The fast food chain sent an app alert on Wednesday, saying: "It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
Yes, as a general rule meat and dairy mixed isn't kosher, though there is some debate over poultry.
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
Violence would be a daft move because there are far more people willing and hoping to do violence to them than they could possibly imagine. All they are looking for is an excuse.
A few martyrs for the cause always works a treat.
‘This year’s Emily Wilding Davison medal goes to Jeremy X, beaten to death by ruddy faced commuters on the North Circular.’
I think you overstate the public opinion of them.
I would think the public was pretty pissed off with EW Davison what with endangering horses and riders and screwing up the race.
I doubt it. Bothering a few toffs following the gee gees doesn't compare with stopping people reaching medical appointments or missing flights and job interviews. You know, real life rather than fantasy.
My colleague missed a flight to New York yesterday because of the protest - in the taxi for 5 hours! (I got the flight as I was taking a different route).
Interestingly though he seemed to be most irritated by the over talkative taxi driver who didn't shut up for the whole journey, and he reflected that "maybe someone's trying to tell me something about the sustainability of taking intercontinental flights". [reader, he took the later plane to JFK].
This is not, I promise, one of those made up "and everyone on the train clapped" moments. The effect is perhaps to pull on the conscience of people who are already green-inclined but a little complacent.
And yet for the converse I have an archaeologist staying with me a couple of nights a week at the moment who lives in Kent but teaches at a local college in Lincolnshire. She is a vegan and very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil. She has nothing but scorn for these protestors, not least because she missed all the classes she was supposed to be teaching yesterday because of the M25 delays. As she said, if they are even turning her off the cause then she hates to think what they are doing to the wider public.
Maybe she's just revealing her true colours? If she's that anti-oil, regularly driving back and forth between Kent and Lincolnshire isn't exactly practising as she preaches. Edit: She sounds like an ex-colleague of mine who was oh-so-attuned to the feelings of Mother Earth while flying regularly to Bali to hear the preachings of her favourite guru.
Nope, everyone has to make a living. And until she can afford to find somewhere to live up here permanently it is either commute or unemployment. Again, real world stuff rather than the arrogant fantasy that you and Ishmael indulge in.
Arrogant fantasy? All I was doing was pointing out the obvious inconsistency of your colleague's words and deeds. If she were really "very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil" then she would make an effort to organise her life accordingly. An integral part of being very strongly green is an acceptance that you may have to inconvenience yourself for the greater good of the planet. She doesn't sound very green at all to me.
I don't know about your circumstances. Maybe you are one of the very few people who is fortunate enough to be able to do so, but most people are not able to just 'organise their lives' in the way you claim. She makes single roundtrip journey from Kent to Lincolnshire once a week for her job and probably travels not many more miles doing so than someone commuting into London 5 times a week from the home counties. Should they impoverish themselves as well to suit your view of what is right and wrong.
I would also point out that you are currently using a computer made of oil, utilising electricity probably derived from hydrocarbons via a network and ISP server predominantly made of oil, all for your own amusement, to criticise someone trying to get to a job earn a living and having to burn oil to do so. There is more than a tiny degree of hypocrisy in your position. And the same goes for our ex smoking friend Ishmael.
I don't know about you, Richard, but almost all my energy comes from Stored Solar.
The fast food chain sent an app alert on Wednesday, saying: "It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
Just WOW!!!!
At least they dropped the Belsen Burger - topped with bacon......
(1) Somebody knows something about the ballots that are still to come. (Not implausible.) (2) Someone is very foolishly betting based on the NYTimes and other suggesting that Cortez Masto is likely to win. (Quite possible.) (3) Someone is hedging an existing Senate control bet and it's a very illiquid market, so some small bets moved the price a long way. (Unlikely.)
I tend to trust my judgement. But you should always listen to the market. I'm moving my assessment to a narrow Cortez Masto victory.
My method, Which results in betting against you here, is looking at the most recent polls from trusted pollsters before voting. Overall That points to her loss.
That would be already knowing the opinion of some of the people in the stacks of votes not counted, other than second guessing it based on historical voting from that area?
The trouble is that Nevada polls almost always under state the Democratic candidate.
It is the reverse of the Shy Trump problem. They can't find enough poor Latinos who the unioms turnout to vote Dem.
They can understate it, and she still loses from this position. She is Latino after all. Suggests to me more likely to be understated last time than this time.
And when you say polls “you mean only the good ones” not pollution from Cowboy ones.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Thank you.
I think it’s now Candidate(s) % Votes
Kelly Incumbent 51.4% 979,509 95,318 ahead
Masters 46.4% 884,191 Est. vote in: 76%
Laxalt 49.4% 436,854 15,812 ahead
Cortez Masto Incumbent 47.6% 421,042 Est. vote in: 84%
I agree with you, Kelly and Laxalt win here (nice win bet for me on Laxalt)
A 50/50 senate, one pick up each, provided Warnock wins in playoff.
None of us has it 100% Warnock wins, but I really not sure the votes are there for him this time. The GOP can still take senate I call a value bet worth considering today.
Over 300 available at 12.0 for Laxalt so somebody is v confident he's gonna lose.
Can’t they actually lock up these morons, I thought there was a legislation change recently to expand the definition of disruptive behaviour?
Bottom line up front - these protestors only recognise fire as fire. The Native Americans knew distinction between good fire, bad fire.
So what the protesters are achieving is two fold.
Firstly, if you believed in their causes, like insulate Britain asap, and so willing to explain it to your mates in a bar before these protests, you are less likely too now, hence they are killing their own cause and making it less likely to happen. Secondly, the only thing they are empowering to happen is a Bill to limit right to protest and clamp down harder on protests being introduced by government and passed by parliament. So they are wrecking freedom for everyone else.
The politics of someone like Braverman benefits from the actions of these protestors.
They aren't trying to convince anyone of anything. The aim is to keep environmental issues in the news. We aren't going to get the necessary changes by stupid fucking voting. Direct action is required.
I admire their persistence but they should be A LOT more violent.
Violence would be a daft move because there are far more people willing and hoping to do violence to them than they could possibly imagine. All they are looking for is an excuse.
A few martyrs for the cause always works a treat.
‘This year’s Emily Wilding Davison medal goes to Jeremy X, beaten to death by ruddy faced commuters on the North Circular.’
I think you overstate the public opinion of them.
I would think the public was pretty pissed off with EW Davison what with endangering horses and riders and screwing up the race.
I doubt it. Bothering a few toffs following the gee gees doesn't compare with stopping people reaching medical appointments or missing flights and job interviews. You know, real life rather than fantasy.
My colleague missed a flight to New York yesterday because of the protest - in the taxi for 5 hours! (I got the flight as I was taking a different route).
Interestingly though he seemed to be most irritated by the over talkative taxi driver who didn't shut up for the whole journey, and he reflected that "maybe someone's trying to tell me something about the sustainability of taking intercontinental flights". [reader, he took the later plane to JFK].
This is not, I promise, one of those made up "and everyone on the train clapped" moments. The effect is perhaps to pull on the conscience of people who are already green-inclined but a little complacent.
And yet for the converse I have an archaeologist staying with me a couple of nights a week at the moment who lives in Kent but teaches at a local college in Lincolnshire. She is a vegan and very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil. She has nothing but scorn for these protestors, not least because she missed all the classes she was supposed to be teaching yesterday because of the M25 delays. As she said, if they are even turning her off the cause then she hates to think what they are doing to the wider public.
Maybe she's just revealing her true colours? If she's that anti-oil, regularly driving back and forth between Kent and Lincolnshire isn't exactly practising as she preaches. Edit: She sounds like an ex-colleague of mine who was oh-so-attuned to the feelings of Mother Earth while flying regularly to Bali to hear the preachings of her favourite guru.
Nope, everyone has to make a living. And until she can afford to find somewhere to live up here permanently it is either commute or unemployment. Again, real world stuff rather than the arrogant fantasy that you and Ishmael indulge in.
Arrogant fantasy? All I was doing was pointing out the obvious inconsistency of your colleague's words and deeds. If she were really "very strongly green in her outlook and anti-oil" then she would make an effort to organise her life accordingly. An integral part of being very strongly green is an acceptance that you may have to inconvenience yourself for the greater good of the planet. She doesn't sound very green at all to me.
I don't know about your circumstances. Maybe you are one of the very few people who is fortunate enough to be able to do so, but most people are not able to just 'organise their lives' in the way you claim. She makes single roundtrip journey from Kent to Lincolnshire once a week for her job and probably travels not many more miles doing so than someone commuting into London 5 times a week from the home counties. Should they impoverish themselves as well to suit your view of what is right and wrong.
I would also point out that you are currently using a computer made of oil, utilising electricity probably derived from hydrocarbons via a network and ISP server predominantly made of oil, all for your own amusement, to criticise someone trying to get to a job earn a living and having to burn oil to do so. There is more than a tiny degree of hypocrisy in your position. And the same goes for our ex smoking friend Ishmael.
I don't know about you, Richard, but almost all my energy comes from Stored Solar.
Well you do live in California. You probably get more sun on a cloudy day than we get in a year.
Why can't Just Stop Oil be pleased about the fact that more than half of UK energy is regularly produced by renewables? Just a few years ago it was a very small percentage.
(1) Somebody knows something about the ballots that are still to come. (Not implausible.) (2) Someone is very foolishly betting based on the NYTimes and other suggesting that Cortez Masto is likely to win. (Quite possible.) (3) Someone is hedging an existing Senate control bet and it's a very illiquid market, so some small bets moved the price a long way. (Unlikely.)
I tend to trust my judgement. But you should always listen to the market. I'm moving my assessment to a narrow Cortez Masto victory.
My method, Which results in betting against you here, is looking at the most recent polls from trusted pollsters before voting. Overall That points to her loss.
That would be already knowing the opinion of some of the people in the stacks of votes not counted, other than second guessing it based on historical voting from that area?
The trouble is that Nevada polls almost always under state the Democratic candidate.
It is the reverse of the Shy Trump problem. They can't find enough poor Latinos who the unioms turnout to vote Dem.
They can understate it, and she still loses from this position. She is Latino after all. Suggests to me more likely to be understated last time than this time.
And when you say polls “you mean only the good ones” not pollution from Cowboy ones.
I do indeed mean good polls.
Harry Reid beat the polling average by over 5 points because Nevada Dems know how to turnout the vote.
It is a pattern repeated again and again, every election the Dems are goong to lose Nevada, every year they outperform the polls.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Thank you.
I think it’s now Candidate(s) % Votes
Kelly Incumbent 51.4% 979,509 95,318 ahead
Masters 46.4% 884,191 Est. vote in: 76%
Laxalt 49.4% 436,854 15,812 ahead
Cortez Masto Incumbent 47.6% 421,042 Est. vote in: 84%
I agree with you, Kelly and Laxalt win here (nice win bet for me on Laxalt)
A 50/50 senate, one pick up each, provided Warnock wins in playoff.
None of us has it 100% Warnock wins, but I really not sure the votes are there for him this time. The GOP can still take senate I call a value bet worth considering today.
Over 300 available at 12.0 for Laxalt so somebody is v confident he's gonna lose.
Is it better to follow the vagaries of the betting markets, or stick to analysis of polling which brought you here in first place?
The fast food chain sent an app alert on Wednesday, saying: "It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
Yes, as a general rule meat and dairy mixed isn't kosher, though there is some debate over poultry.
Thou shalt not seethe a kid in its mother's milk ... though the overriding connotation I have is of broken glass. Quite the last thing one wants to have in mind when thinking if one fancies a burger. Can't imagine what they were thinking of.
Large numbers of villages reportedly falling to the Ukrainian forces in Kherson now.
Russian morale must be rock bottom. They were told this was now Russia they were defending. Now they are scurrying towards Crimea as fast as they can, after the loss of thousands of dead and injured - for what?
I posted this just before the threads changed yesterday, but thought it worth repeating.
Russia's retreat in Kherson is a disaster for the Ukrainians:
Large numbers of villages reportedly falling to the Ukrainian forces in Kherson now.
Russian morale must be rock bottom. They were told this was now Russia they were defending. Now they are scurrying towards Crimea as fast as they can, after the loss of thousands of dead and injured - for what?
I posted this just before the threads changed yesterday, but thought it worth repeating.
Russia's retreat in Kherson is a disaster for the Ukrainians:
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Thank you.
I think it’s now Candidate(s) % Votes
Kelly Incumbent 51.4% 979,509 95,318 ahead
Masters 46.4% 884,191 Est. vote in: 76%
Laxalt 49.4% 436,854 15,812 ahead
Cortez Masto Incumbent 47.6% 421,042 Est. vote in: 84%
I agree with you, Kelly and Laxalt win here (nice win bet for me on Laxalt)
A 50/50 senate, one pick up each, provided Warnock wins in playoff.
None of us has it 100% Warnock wins, but I really not sure the votes are there for him this time. The GOP can still take senate I call a value bet worth considering today.
Over 300 available at 12.0 for Laxalt so somebody is v confident he's gonna lose.
I'd edit that if my phone would let me as already posted elsewhere.
(1) Somebody knows something about the ballots that are still to come. (Not implausible.) (2) Someone is very foolishly betting based on the NYTimes and other suggesting that Cortez Masto is likely to win. (Quite possible.) (3) Someone is hedging an existing Senate control bet and it's a very illiquid market, so some small bets moved the price a long way. (Unlikely.)
I tend to trust my judgement. But you should always listen to the market. I'm moving my assessment to a narrow Cortez Masto victory.
My method, Which results in betting against you here, is looking at the most recent polls from trusted pollsters before voting. Overall That points to her loss.
That would be already knowing the opinion of some of the people in the stacks of votes not counted, other than second guessing it based on historical voting from that area?
The trouble is that Nevada polls almost always under state the Democratic candidate.
It is the reverse of the Shy Trump problem. They can't find enough poor Latinos who the unioms turnout to vote Dem.
They can understate it, and she still loses from this position. She is Latino after all. Suggests to me more likely to be understated last time than this time.
And when you say polls “you mean only the good ones” not pollution from Cowboy ones.
I do indeed mean good polls.
Harry Reid beat the polling average by over 5 points because Nevada Dems know how to turnout the vote.
It is a pattern repeated again and again, every election the Dems are goong to lose Nevada, every year they outperform the polls.
So it’s MoonRabbits poll analysis versus The World. 😆
Will Ralston be roaring or railing at the Rabbit on the moon?
Large numbers of villages reportedly falling to the Ukrainian forces in Kherson now.
Russian morale must be rock bottom. They were told this was now Russia they were defending. Now they are scurrying towards Crimea as fast as they can, after the loss of thousands of dead and injured - for what?
I’m still not counting my chickens when it comes to Kherson city itself, there’s something not quite right there and the Ukranians will approach it slowly and carefully.
Goalkeepers: Jordan Pickford (Everton) Nick Pope (Newcastle), Aaron Ramsdale (Arsenal).
Defenders: Trent Alexander-Arnold (Liverpool), Conor Coady (on loan at Everton from Wolves), Eric Dier (Tottenham), Harry Maguire (Manchester United), Luke Shaw (Manchester United), John Stones (Manchester City), Kieran Trippier (Newcastle), Kyle Walker (Manchester City) Ben White (Arsenal).
Midfielders: Jude Bellingham (Borussia Dortmund), Mason Mount (Chelsea), Kalvin Phillips (Manchester City), Declan Rice (West Ham), James Maddison (Leicester City), Jordan Henderson (Liverpool), Conor Gallagher.
Forwards: Marcus Rashford (Man United), Phil Foden (Manchester City), Jack Grealish (Manchester City), Harry Kane (Tottenham), Bukayo Saka (Arsenal), Raheem Sterling (Chelsea), Callum Wilson (Newcastle).
Ah, modern football. Only two actual proper strikers, I think? so a lot riding on Kane.
If 'ary gets injured, its going to be 11 men behind the ball, pray for penalties.
You really are the most miserable, pessimistic doom-monger when it comes to any English national team. It's pretty drab fare Francis.
I know! Not just him either. Lots like that. My whole adult life of 40 odd years we disappoint in the big football tourneys, then Southgate takes us to a WC semi and straight after that a Euro final where we're half the width of a goal post from lifting the trophy. It's a fantastic record. Can't believe the whinging. Utterly pathetic and if I had my way worthy of a swingeing ban from PB.
It’s because Southgate coaches really boring teams. He takes talented players and makes them robots. The fact he’s a boring woke bore makes it worse, but is not critical
Large numbers of villages reportedly falling to the Ukrainian forces in Kherson now.
Russian morale must be rock bottom. They were told this was now Russia they were defending. Now they are scurrying towards Crimea as fast as they can, after the loss of thousands of dead and injured - for what?
I posted this just before the threads changed yesterday, but thought it worth repeating.
Russia's retreat in Kherson is a disaster for the Ukrainians:
The Russian strategy is becoming clear. By retreating to their borders, they will stop the Ukrainian advance in its tracks.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Yep — it'll probably be 50 GOP, 49 Dem going into the Georgia run-off.
Large numbers of villages reportedly falling to the Ukrainian forces in Kherson now.
Russian morale must be rock bottom. They were told this was now Russia they were defending. Now they are scurrying towards Crimea as fast as they can, after the loss of thousands of dead and injured - for what?
You'd think morale would be very low, but they're managing to conduct a fighting retreat from the right bank of the Dnipro, under fire, without it turning into a rout.
In the circumstances that's reasonably impressive, and it suggests that the Russian armed forces as a whole are not on the brink of large scale mutiny.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Yep — it'll probably be 50 GOP, 49 Dem going into the Georgia run-off.
With the Democrats having won most votes of the 2 run off candidates
I don’t fancy Warnock in how that state has voted in this election. A better candidate against him, he would have lost already.
If this playoff is not about Warmnocks opponent this time, but about Dem Party hubris as the economy crisis bites voters, Warnock loses imo.
If it's GOP 50, Dem 49 going in to the runoff, the runoff will be about not letting Trump/MAGA have control of the Senate.
Quick summary of what we've seen in the Senate races in the last 24 hours...
Arizona Boy, the counting is slow. In 24 hours, we've moved from 60% counted to 70%. And in that time, Kelly has slightly extended his lead, from 4.6% to 5.0%. While it's not unreasonable to expect that the coming ballots will tilt Republican, the gap has grown and the number of ballots required to overturn has got ever bigger. I think this one will be called for the Democrats fairly soon.
Nevada Phew, this is a nailbighter. When counting stopped on Tuesday evening, an estimated 70% of ballots had been tallyed, and Laxalt led by 3.0%. We're now at 83%, and the lead is down to 1.8%. Cortez Masto has also pulled ahead in Washoe County, which suggests late breaking ballots are going her way. *BUT*: there's only 17% left to count, and she's only moved the needle 1.2% in the last 13%. That suggests to me that she'll end up just short. It's really going to be down to 0.4-0.5% either way.
Thank you.
I think it’s now Candidate(s) % Votes
Kelly Incumbent 51.4% 979,509 95,318 ahead
Masters 46.4% 884,191 Est. vote in: 76%
Laxalt 49.4% 436,854 15,812 ahead
Cortez Masto Incumbent 47.6% 421,042 Est. vote in: 84%
I agree with you, Kelly and Laxalt win here (nice win bet for me on Laxalt)
A 50/50 senate, one pick up each, provided Warnock wins in playoff.
None of us has it 100% Warnock wins, but I really not sure the votes are there for him this time. The GOP can still take senate I call a value bet worth considering today.
Over 300 available at 12.0 for Laxalt so somebody is v confident he's gonna lose.
I'd edit that if my phone would let me as already posted elsewhere.
Phone will let you if you switch browser to desktop view.
He really has made the issue his own tbf. Out on his own boat every day filming the scene. Tracking people to hotels to see what's happening there. Putting it all out there for us to see and be extremely concerned about.
Taking a break now, I believe, since he's off to the States to be part of the big Trump Run announcement. Will he have a speaking role? Guess so. It's a long way to go to just hang around the stage.
Comments
https://www.politico.eu/article/cop-27-climate-change-app-cybersecurity-weapon-risks/
“Western security advisers are warning delegates at the COP27 climate summit not to download the host Egyptian government's official smartphone app, amid fears it could be used to hack their private emails, texts and even voice conversations.”
Whendowewannit? - Now!!!
Well it is.
You sure?
Yep.
Oh right. Well that's blinking great then. What's on the box tonight?
More recently the same approach has been found severely wanting. And all those talented players have made massive progress for their clubs, have regressed playing in England continued negative style.
I think it’s now Candidate(s) % Votes
Kelly
Incumbent
51.4%
979,509
95,318 ahead
Masters
46.4%
884,191
Est. vote in: 76%
Laxalt
49.4%
436,854
15,812 ahead
Cortez Masto
Incumbent
47.6%
421,042
Est. vote in: 84%
I agree with you, Kelly and Laxalt win here (nice win bet for me on Laxalt)
A 50/50 senate, one pick up each, provided Warnock wins in playoff.
None of us has it 100% Warnock wins, but I really not sure the votes are there for him this time. The GOP can still take senate I call a value bet worth considering today.
Just as you were wrong when you told everyone that England were going to be knocked out by Sri Lanka in the cricket.
You have a weird bias for pessimism.
The football, as far as I remember, I never said England would lose any of the games. I simply said they had a very negative style, but explained exactly what the thinking was....but that after the Euros they needed to develop beyond that if they want to be a top team in the world...they haven't, they have gone backwards as other countries have worked out the very 1-d negative style.
In comparison, I think England T20 setup is way ahead of the pack...and I have said this repeatedly. I have talked about the level of analytics and detail that goes on. In terms of the analysis they do, only select IPL teams are doing the same sort of stuff. Australia etc are in the dark ages.
Hypocrisy is the very worst transgression in British politics, but it's unrealistic to expect advocates for a cause to be paragons of virtue themselves. If it were that simple we'd hardly have any problems at all.
Expecting those advocating for change to be perfect exemplars of that change is an attitude designed to encourage cynicism, and benefits only those for whom the status quo is perfectly fine.
"We fight the woke in the legislature, we fight the woke in the schools, we fight the woke in the corporations. We will never ever surrender."
https://twitter.com/tomhfh/status/1590689223270490113?s=20&t=rbwgIxI1oSWFpETvy-XmQg
"Here's what we know on the Nevada Senate race, if we assume the rurals are all but spent, will only add a couple thousand at most to Laxalt's lead:
If CCM continues to win urban mail at current clip, taking 65%, she will easily overtake Laxalt with 110,000 mail (at least) left."
If her margin decreases from 65-30 to 60-30, for instance, she would still in decisively.
If it is 60-35, same.
If it's 55-30, same.
If it's 55-35, same.
She wins in all those models."
Long time readers of PB will know that Ralston gets quoted on here every US election re Nevada and he has a very, very high reputation.
https://twitter.com/RalstonReports?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author
(1) Somebody knows something about the ballots that are still to come. (Not implausible.)
(2) Someone is very foolishly betting based on the NYTimes and other suggesting that Cortez Masto is likely to win. (Quite possible.)
(3) Someone is hedging an existing Senate control bet and it's a very illiquid market, so some small bets moved the price a long way. (Unlikely.)
I tend to trust my judgement. But you should always listen to the market. I'm moving my assessment to a narrow Cortez Masto victory.
I would also point out that you are currently using a computer made of oil, utilising electricity probably derived from hydrocarbons via a network and ISP server predominantly made of oil, all for your own amusement, to criticise someone trying to get to a job earn a living and having to burn oil to do so. There is more than a tiny degree of hypocrisy in your position. And the same goes for our ex smoking friend Ishmael.
If this playoff is not about Warmnocks opponent this time, but about Dem Party hubris as the economy crisis bites voters, Warnock loses imo.
https://twitter.com/ralstonreports/status/1590595387005337600?s=46&t=gzBXigoRA5G5EpBlKf03fg
I'm assuming people have seen this but in case they haven't because the view seemed to be CCM might struggle
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63499057
The fast food chain sent an app alert on Wednesday, saying: "It's memorial day for Kristallnacht! Treat yourself with more tender cheese on your crispy chicken. Now at KFCheese!"
It'd be an odd protest movement who opted for the technique of sitting around having balanced 'big picture' discussions overflowing with context and perspective.
And tbh I often suspect that those keen to steer things that way are actually saying, "oh ffs, do stop banging on, can't you see I'm reading the paper."
https://twitter.com/HowardMortman/status/1590411668353609728
That would be already knowing the opinion of some of the people in the stacks of votes not counted, other than second guessing it based on historical voting from that area?
Warnock lead up by more than 20k to 38k.
Now Warnock now leads 49.4 to 48.5.
(Was previously 49.2 to 48.7).
As with 99.997% of the rest of the population.
It is just the very obvious point that protesters up a gantry aren't going to stop people doing what they believe they should or need or want to do.
https://medium.com/britainelects/previewing-the-nine-by-elections-of-10th-november-2022-95ceb63f6351
Rosehill with Burnley Wood, Burnley Council, C defence: C, L, LD, G
Greasley, Broxtowe Council, C defence: C, L, LD
Bourne East, South Kesteven Council, C defence:C, L, LD, G, I
Grantham St Wulfram’s, South Kesteven Council, C defence:C, L, G, I
Cannock West, Cannock Chase Council, C defence:C, L, G
Braintree South, Braintree Council, C(I) defence:C, L, G
Coggeshall, Braintree Council, I defence:C, L, I
Green Lane and St James, Kingston upon Thames Council, LD defence:C, L, LD, Kingston Ind Residents
Newton Poppleford and Harpford, East Devon Council, Ind East Devon Alliance defence:C, L, I
@OldKingCole has provided local insight earlier into Coggeshall.
https://twitter.com/tier10k/status/1590713278447198209?t=Qhx3J0D0mnh6r9LeA2wpmQ&s=19
And I speak as someone who has money riding on a GOP senate majority.
It is the reverse of the Shy Trump problem. They can't find enough poor Latinos who the unioms turnout to vote Dem.
This is why AI should not be trusted to send out material automatically. Prepare it maybe, but have a human say yes or no. Ouch.
ETA chicken and cheese is non kosher, in case you think it couldn't get worse.
In January 2021 Ossoff for instance picked up 2.7% more votes in the runoff than he won in the first round to win the seat for the Democrats.
Though to be honest even if the GOP do win it to get to 51 (if they also hold their lead in Nevada) it would still be well short of the gains they wanted and leave Mitt Romney effectively with the casting vote, who Biden could certainly do deals with on foreign treaties, SC justices appointments etc where Senate control is most relevant
Russian morale must be rock bottom. They were told this was now Russia they were defending. Now they are scurrying towards Crimea as fast as they can, after the loss of thousands of dead and injured - for what?
If there is a bunch then it is on like Donley Kong. However looking at historical results my estimation isn that the vast remainder of outstanding vote is in Washoe and Clark.
Torn up your imaginary ticket btw. The 3.9 looks rubbish now.
Tens of thousands of mail in ballots have been counted and they are 2:1 Cortez.
There are approx 100,000 still to count.
Reasonable to extrapolate based on a sample of well over 10,000.
And when you say polls “you mean only the good ones” not pollution from Cowboy ones.
Unless the order of counting has a touch of “mirage” about it. Can you be sure it hasn’t?
Harry Reid beat the polling average by over 5 points because Nevada Dems know how to turnout the vote.
It is a pattern repeated again and again, every election the Dems are goong to lose Nevada, every year they outperform the polls.
Russia's retreat in Kherson is a disaster for the Ukrainians:
Will Ralston be roaring or railing at the Rabbit on the moon?
An employee says it will be up to engineers to “self-certify compliance with FTC requirements and other laws.”
https://twitter.com/CaseyNewton/status/1590724257608134657
https://www.gbnews.uk/news/exclusive-poll-nightmare-for-rishi-sunak-public-furious-as-uk-migration-rages-out-of-control/383163
In the circumstances that's reasonably impressive, and it suggests that the Russian armed forces as a whole are not on the brink of large scale mutiny.
Taking a break now, I believe, since he's off to the States to be part of the big Trump Run announcement. Will he have a speaking role? Guess so. It's a long way to go to just hang around the stage.
MSNBC's @JoyAnnReid: "What job will Lauren Boebert have if she loses?"
@kurtbardella: "I guess it might be a gain for OnlyFans"
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1590520221064122368?s=46&t=T1K1mGdZgjvjZ1beG9FGkQ