Lock him up has majority support – politicalbetting.com

System · May 13

Lock him up has majority support – politicalbetting.com

If Donald Trump keeps violating his gag order, as he has done 10 times now, 51% of Americans believe that jail time would be an appropriate sentence. That includes the vast majority of Biden supporters.https://t.co/JrdllMzfwR https://t.co/PisWnozQ2U pic.twitter.com/DkNA48XuTr

Read the full story here

TheScreamingEagles · May 13

This is why pronouns matter.

The MAGA lot were fine with 'lock her up' but as soon as it became 'lock him up' they lost their shit.

TheScreamingEagles · May 13

FPT

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

wooliedyed said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

wooliedyed said:

SirNorfolkPassmore said:
It seems to me that Sunak's speech sets up a question to which he may not wish to hear the answer.

He paints a picture of great dangers and great opportunities in the next few years - so who do you want to take charge of dealing with that? The answer, rather obviously, is not you Prime Minister.
Pitching to the large swathe of 2019 Tory to DKs and, to a lesser extent, Reform. Everything he does from here is about maximising his losing percentage of the vote
I don't see how that pitches to them. It simply reminds them why they parted ways.
Because he's putting himself up as the stop Labour guy. Danger ahead, stick with us, labour is a risk.
It won't work, it'll add little to his score but he's out of road so it is what it is, a load of desperate shite
I think the problem is that the obvious logic is, when troubles are ahead, you don't want a man you see as weak at the head of a party you see as hopelessly divided, presiding over a government which you see as having run out of steam.

The approach draws attention to Sunak's biggest problems. If the aim is damage limitation, I'd highlight policy areas. Setting the election up as, "who do you trust to form a competent government?" is a bad move.

It's very 'who governs'.

Stark_Dawning · May 13

Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?

TheScreamingEagles · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?

That would be the Rishi Sunak who received a FPN for violating lockdown rules.

Malmesbury · May 13

The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.

TheScreamingEagles · May 13

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.

Yup, they know this will got to SCOTUS and their decision needs to be unimpeachable.

Luckyguy1983 · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?

Why would he want to remind people of a leader who even at his polling nadir had popularity Sunak could only dream of?

williamglenn · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?

He could accuse Starmer of personally spreading "the Johnson variant".

148grss · May 13

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.

Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.

wooliedyed · May 13

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.

There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt

148grss · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?

Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.

Stark_Dawning · May 13

williamglenn said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
He could accuse Starmer of personally spreading "the Johnson variant".

The attack ads write themselves: Super Spreader Starmer: the man who gorged himself on cheap booze and popadoms with reckless indifference while England reeled.

148grss · May 13

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt

I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.

kyf_100 · May 13

TheScreamingEagles said:
This is why pronouns matter.

The MAGA lot were fine with 'lock her up' but as soon as it became 'lock him up' they lost their shit.

Lock them up works. And is very on trend, post-Eurovision.

Benpointer · May 13

TheScreamingEagles said:
This is why pronouns matter.

The MAGA lot were fine with 'lock her up' but as soon as it became 'lock him up' they lost their shit.

Lock THEM up!

(The whole bloody family.)

148grss · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:

williamglenn said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
He could accuse Starmer of personally spreading "the Johnson variant".
The attack ads write themselves: Super Spreader Starmer: the man who gorged himself on cheap booze and popadoms with reckless indifference while England reeled.

And the response ads write themselves: Eat Out To Help Out - Sunak Killed Your Nan for Economic Bump...

wooliedyed · May 13

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.

You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?

Mexicanpete · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?

He has the chutzpah and his own fixed penalty notice. That would make Starmer a hatrick of Covid law-bending PMs.

Edit. Beaten to it by TSE and by a country mile.

wooliedyed · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:

williamglenn said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
He could accuse Starmer of personally spreading "the Johnson variant".
The attack ads write themselves: Super Spreader Starmer: the man who gorged himself on cheap booze and popadoms with reckless indifference while England reeled.

The Mary Foy/Korma variant.
The Labour Lurgy.

williamglenn · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:

williamglenn said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
He could accuse Starmer of personally spreading "the Johnson variant".
The attack ads write themselves: Super Spreader Starmer: the man who gorged himself on cheap booze and popadoms with reckless indifference while England reeled.

Billboards with Starmer wearing an SS logo ready to terrorise Britain.

SeaShantyIrish2 · May 13

TheScreamingEagles said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
That would be the Rishi Sunak who received a FPN for violating lockdown rules.

Rishi Sunak is really NOT a natural Trumpian politico. Not hardly.

Instead, much more in the Mitt Romney mold. Capable of bare-faced lying but NOT in reveling in it the way DJT can, does and always will.

eek · May 13

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.

Empty suit versus an obviously pointless one with no ideas or plans for today’s issues or tomorrows.

For most people na empty suit is the better option

Benpointer · May 13

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.

Chapeau!

turbotubbs · May 13

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.

BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.

148grss · May 13

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?

If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.

Benpointer · May 13

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.

Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".

SeaShantyIrish2 · May 13

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.

You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.

wooliedyed · May 13

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.

Yeah, that's absolutely not how any other NY false accounting trial would proceed.

Mexicanpete · May 13

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".

Uh, oh!

https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/13/gps-warn-patients-wear-face-masks-whooping-cough-cases-increase-20826771/

turbotubbs · May 13

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".

Too early! Twitter is awash with the next bird flu pandemic!

But, yes, I whole heartedly agree. And yet - I am heading to the Discworld convention in August and they are still (as far as I know) planning on asking everyone to mask. Madness.

Scott_xP · May 13

@RMCunliffe

UPDATE:

CCHQ have confirmed that this email was genuine

"We are aware of an issue relating to a conference registration email and are currently investigating the cause of this.

We apologise to those affected and have self-reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office."

@RMCunliffe

"If you can’t trust the Conservatives with your email address, why should you trust them with anything else?"

Me on today's CCHQ data breach - which, with Rishi Sunak delivering a big speech on keeping us safe, could not have come at a more ironic moment

148grss · May 13

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.
You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.

I think you're wrong on this. I think Trump is doing what he always does - push the limits of what people will let him get away with until norms are broken and he wins. I'm not saying that he wouldn't use jail as an opportunity for martyrdom. But I don't think he wants to be in jail - if he did he could do more flagrant nonsense.

turbotubbs · May 13

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Uh, oh!

https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/13/gps-warn-patients-wear-face-masks-whooping-cough-cases-increase-20826771/

I believe I had whooping cough back in 2003 - huge coughing fits that ended with me gasping for air with the characteristic whooping sound. Not nice.

wooliedyed · May 13

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Uh, oh!

https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/13/gps-warn-patients-wear-face-masks-whooping-cough-cases-increase-20826771/

Maybe they can make up some shit about asymptomatic spread and get us wearing them when we stand up in the pub again.

148grss · May 13

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Uh, oh!

https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/13/gps-warn-patients-wear-face-masks-whooping-cough-cases-increase-20826771/

I have had a cough now for almost 2 months. Dry cough, catching in my throat, stabbing pain in my chest. Dunno if it's long covid related, but I can't seem to shift it. Very annoying...

RochdalePioneers · May 13

On topic, has the Donald considered what him getting locked up actually does?

The brutal reality is that he appears to be a massive coward, so getting locked up isn’t likely to be something he will enjoy. I know he keeps saying he will martyr himself for the MAGA purists, but to do so he actually physically goes to jail.

So he does his time. And despite his terror he manages to bluff it on release. But what does he find? “Lock Him Up” has gone viral, intercutting all the Hillary chants with footage of him being convicted and jailed. The MAGA crown may be impressed, but everyone else is appalled. Hard to claim the system is rigged when you’ve committed contempt 11 times…

He’s too stupid to get this. And every ex advisor tells the same story - he doesn’t listen. So please Donald, do it…

Mexicanpete · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:

williamglenn said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
He could accuse Starmer of personally spreading "the Johnson variant".
The attack ads write themselves: Super Spreader Starmer: the man who gorged himself on cheap booze and popadoms allegedly with the ghost Jimmy Savile while England reeled.

Surely something more dramatic works better. See above.

Taz · May 13

Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14

Benpointer · May 13

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.
You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.

The judge shouldn't take Trump's (or your) preferences into account - he should decide it on the law and in the same way he would for any other defendant.

Luckyguy1983 · May 13

148grss said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.
You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.
I think you're wrong on this. I think Trump is doing what he always does - push the limits of what people will let him get away with until norms are broken and he wins. I'm not saying that he wouldn't use jail as an opportunity for martyrdom. But I don't think he wants to be in jail - if he did he could do more flagrant nonsense.

He isn't going to shoot someone just to get into gaol - the point is to be sent there unfairly by a kangaroo court.

Benpointer · May 13

148grss said:

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Uh, oh!

https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/13/gps-warn-patients-wear-face-masks-whooping-cough-cases-increase-20826771/
I have had a cough now for almost 2 months. Dry cough, catching in my throat, stabbing pain in my chest. Dunno if it's long covid related, but I can't seem to shift it. Very annoying...

I hope you've had that checked out properly.

Mexicanpete · May 13

148grss said:

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Uh, oh!

https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/13/gps-warn-patients-wear-face-masks-whooping-cough-cases-increase-20826771/
I have had a cough now for almost 2 months. Dry cough, catching in my throat, stabbing pain in my chest. Dunno if it's long covid related, but I can't seem to shift it. Very annoying...

You might have the 100 day cough. I endured that back in September, October and November.

williamglenn · May 13

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.
You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.

It makes you wonder whether the people prosecuting Trump have been paid by the Russians...

148grss · May 13

turbotubbs said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Too early! Twitter is awash with the next bird flu pandemic!

But, yes, I whole heartedly agree. And yet - I am heading to the Discworld convention in August and they are still (as far as I know) planning on asking everyone to mask. Madness.

I mean, masking showed not only a reduction in covid but a lot of other illnesses, including flu. It's not a huge burden to wear a mask, especially at a gathering of lots of people from lots of different areas who are likely using public transport / airplanes etc to get to and from things. I think it's a sign of the times that something not that cumbersome that clearly helps society at large has become such a to do. I don't think everyone needs to wear one all the time - but it makes sense for public transport, the tube, big gatherings, etc.

wooliedyed · May 13

RochdalePioneers said:
On topic, has the Donald considered what him getting locked up actually does?

The brutal reality is that he appears to be a massive coward, so getting locked up isn’t likely to be something he will enjoy. I know he keeps saying he will martyr himself for the MAGA purists, but to do so he actually physically goes to jail.

So he does his time. And despite his terror he manages to bluff it on release. But what does he find? “Lock Him Up” has gone viral, intercutting all the Hillary chants with footage of him being convicted and jailed. The MAGA crown may be impressed, but everyone else is appalled. Hard to claim the system is rigged when you’ve committed contempt 11 times…

He’s too stupid to get this. And every ex advisor tells the same story - he doesn’t listen. So please Donald, do it…

He wouldn't be locked up though. The secret service will babysit him at Mar A Lago for the duration.

Benpointer · May 13

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14

Good to see the priority problems the country faces being addressed. You can't go anywhere these days without bumping into someone whose life has been utterly ruined by a coloured lanyard.

williamglenn · May 13

wooliedyed said:

RochdalePioneers said:
On topic, has the Donald considered what him getting locked up actually does?

The brutal reality is that he appears to be a massive coward, so getting locked up isn’t likely to be something he will enjoy. I know he keeps saying he will martyr himself for the MAGA purists, but to do so he actually physically goes to jail.

So he does his time. And despite his terror he manages to bluff it on release. But what does he find? “Lock Him Up” has gone viral, intercutting all the Hillary chants with footage of him being convicted and jailed. The MAGA crown may be impressed, but everyone else is appalled. Hard to claim the system is rigged when you’ve committed contempt 11 times…

He’s too stupid to get this. And every ex advisor tells the same story - he doesn’t listen. So please Donald, do it…
He wouldn't be locked up though. The secret service will babysit him at Mar A Lago for the duration.

He'd be the American Aung San Suu Kyi.

148grss · May 13

Benpointer said:

148grss said:

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Uh, oh!

https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/13/gps-warn-patients-wear-face-masks-whooping-cough-cases-increase-20826771/
I have had a cough now for almost 2 months. Dry cough, catching in my throat, stabbing pain in my chest. Dunno if it's long covid related, but I can't seem to shift it. Very annoying...
I hope you've had that checked out properly.

Nurse a few weeks back said it was likely just viral, but now GP is gonna see me at the end of the week. We shall see

Mexicanpete · May 13

williamglenn said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.
You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.
It makes you wonder whether the people prosecuting Trump have been paid by the Russians...

Why not, perhaps via Deutche Bank? Just like ...

Nigelb · May 13

Today is Cohen day.

https://twitter.com/TylerMcBrien/status/1790025735408701908
..Cohen describes what was discussed at the meeting with Pecker: the power of the NE* in terms of its location at the cash registers of so many supermarkets and bodegas that if can place (+) stories about Mr Trump, that would be beneficial, and if we could place (-) stories...

*National Enquirer

Benpointer · May 13

williamglenn said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.
You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.
It makes you wonder whether the people prosecuting Trump have been paid by the Russians...

No, it makes *you* wonder; no sane person gives it a moment's consideration.

TOPPING · May 13

turbotubbs said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Too early! Twitter is awash with the next bird flu pandemic!

But, yes, I whole heartedly agree. And yet - I am heading to the Discworld convention in August and they are still (as far as I know) planning on asking everyone to mask. Madness.

That is absurd. Beyond madness, psychopathic. Plus 2x LFT tests (and where the fuck do you get those from these days).

This is what our anti-Covid measures have bequeathed us.

https://dwcon.org/useful-information/rules-policies/covid-19-policy/

Mexicanpete · May 13

williamglenn said:

wooliedyed said:

RochdalePioneers said:
On topic, has the Donald considered what him getting locked up actually does?

The brutal reality is that he appears to be a massive coward, so getting locked up isn’t likely to be something he will enjoy. I know he keeps saying he will martyr himself for the MAGA purists, but to do so he actually physically goes to jail.

So he does his time. And despite his terror he manages to bluff it on release. But what does he find? “Lock Him Up” has gone viral, intercutting all the Hillary chants with footage of him being convicted and jailed. The MAGA crown may be impressed, but everyone else is appalled. Hard to claim the system is rigged when you’ve committed contempt 11 times…

He’s too stupid to get this. And every ex advisor tells the same story - he doesn’t listen. So please Donald, do it…
He wouldn't be locked up though. The secret service will babysit him at Mar A Lago for the duration.
He'd be the American Aung San Suu Kyi.

Listening to Dave Lee Travis from the comfort of his house arrest.

kinabalu · May 13

Stark_Dawning said:

williamglenn said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
He could accuse Starmer of personally spreading "the Johnson variant".
The attack ads write themselves: Super Spreader Starmer: the man who gorged himself on cheap booze and popadoms with reckless indifference while England reeled.

You and MexPete are becoming very much the Pete and Dud of this strain of commentary.

148grss · May 13

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14

Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.

Mexicanpete · May 13

kinabalu said:

Stark_Dawning said:

williamglenn said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
He could accuse Starmer of personally spreading "the Johnson variant".
The attack ads write themselves: Super Spreader Starmer: the man who gorged himself on cheap booze and popadoms with reckless indifference while England reeled.
You and MexPete are becoming very much the Pete and Dud of this strain of commentary.

Derek and Clive surely.

148grss · May 13

williamglenn said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.
You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.
It makes you wonder whether the people prosecuting Trump have been paid by the Russians...

This is part of the same problem, though. If you can't prosecute him because it "plays into his hands" then what can you do? Is he above the law by default? He can't just be allowed to keep breaking the law - no matter who he is. But the problem is everyone treats him with kid gloves and when they do that is a kind of justification for the belief that maybe he is special and he is above the law.

williamglenn · May 13

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.

If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?

kinabalu · May 13

Mexicanpete said:

kinabalu said:

Stark_Dawning said:

williamglenn said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
He could accuse Starmer of personally spreading "the Johnson variant".
The attack ads write themselves: Super Spreader Starmer: the man who gorged himself on cheap booze and popadoms with reckless indifference while England reeled.
You and MexPete are becoming very much the Pete and Dud of this strain of commentary.
Derek and Clive surely.

Yes, them too. But you're a bit too clean.

148grss · May 13

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.
If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?

Women are a separate category to men - does that imply they are outside the norm?

It is perfectly easy to say that people have different characteristics and yet it is normal (in a normative as well as statistical sense) for people to have a rare characteristic. It is normal to be ginger, even if it is rare.

williamglenn · May 13

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.
If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?
Women are a separate category to men - does that imply they are outside the norm?

It is perfectly easy to say that people have different characteristics and yet it is normal (in a normative as well as statistical sense) for people to have a rare characteristic. It is normal to be ginger, even if it is rare.

No, women are distinct from men, not distinct from the norm. There's a difference.

Nigelb · May 13

TOPPING said:

turbotubbs said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Too early! Twitter is awash with the next bird flu pandemic!

But, yes, I whole heartedly agree. And yet - I am heading to the Discworld convention in August and they are still (as far as I know) planning on asking everyone to mask. Madness.
That is absurd. Beyond madness, psychopathic. Plus 2x LFT tests (and where the fuck do you get those from these days).

Any large supermarket.
Very useful for differentiating Covid from a more innocuous RTI before you pass it on to your co-workers. I've just had a family member off work for a week; it would have been highly inconvenient just now had I got it too.

It's not paranoia, just common sense. I presume you're a man of leisure ?

DecrepiterJohnL · May 13

I just remarked how many children were in Sainsbury's today, and since it is not half term, presumably they are off sick.

148grss · May 13

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.
If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?
Women are a separate category to men - does that imply they are outside the norm?

It is perfectly easy to say that people have different characteristics and yet it is normal (in a normative as well as statistical sense) for people to have a rare characteristic. It is normal to be ginger, even if it is rare.
No, women are distinct from men, not distinct from the norm. There's a difference.

LGBTQ+ people are distinct from cis het people, not distinct from the norm. There we go.

Mexicanpete · May 13

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14

She has a plan and the plan is working.

nico679 · May 13

Belfast high court judge suspends most of the Illegal Migration Act from coming into force in NI as it breaches the Windsor Framework and therefore the GFA .

The wheels are coming off already from the Rwanda plan .

Benpointer · May 13

nico679 said:
Belfast high court judge suspends most of the Illegal Migration Act from coming into force in NI as it breaches the Windsor Framework and therefore the GFA .

The wheels are coming off already from the Rwanda plan .

Those bloody foreign courts again!

Oh...

AlsoLei · May 13

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.

Poppies must be being banned under the same rule too, surely?

They're both in same 'marks of remembrance, celebration, or commemoration' category of allowed symbols under the neutral workplace rules in NI, for instance (which, for obvious reasons, go quite a bit further than the equivalents in England).

williamglenn · May 13

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.
If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?
Women are a separate category to men - does that imply they are outside the norm?

It is perfectly easy to say that people have different characteristics and yet it is normal (in a normative as well as statistical sense) for people to have a rare characteristic. It is normal to be ginger, even if it is rare.
No, women are distinct from men, not distinct from the norm. There's a difference.
LGBTQ+ people are distinct from cis het people, not distinct from the norm. There we go.

Which category would you put, e.g. Michael Portillo in?

nico679 · May 13

Benpointer said:

nico679 said:
Belfast high court judge suspends most of the Illegal Migration Act from coming into force in NI as it breaches the Windsor Framework and therefore the GFA .

The wheels are coming off already from the Rwanda plan .

Those bloody foreign courts again!

Oh...

The ERG and assorted nutjobs will of course jump on the full ruling where it mentions the ECHR . Of course the pathetic spineless gimp Sunak just threatens to remove the UK from the ECHR in the full knowledge that that would be a major breach of the GFA . And open a Pandora’s box of further problems .

ydoethur · May 13

DecrepiterJohnL said:
I just remarked how many children were in Sainsbury's today, and since it is not half term, presumably they are off sick.

Depends on age. If they were 16 might just have finished their Eng Lit exams (paper 1 was today).

Anabobazina · May 13

CURRYGATE

ydoethur · May 13

So one for those who know something about American law:

Does he have to be jailed immediately on being found in contempt, if he's going to be? Or can the judge hold over sentencing until the end of the trial and *then* jail him?

Stuartinromford · May 13

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:
I just remarked how many children were in Sainsbury's today, and since it is not half term, presumably they are off sick.
Depends on age. If they were 16 might just have finished their Eng Lit exams (paper 1 was today).

And if 11/12, they might be off school to avoid SATs. (Don't know how much 'parents keeping children away for SATs week' is still a thing. Mine is still overjoyed at the free breakfasts the school provides.)

AlsoLei · May 13

nico679 said:

Benpointer said:

nico679 said:
Belfast high court judge suspends most of the Illegal Migration Act from coming into force in NI as it breaches the Windsor Framework and therefore the GFA .

The wheels are coming off already from the Rwanda plan .

Those bloody foreign courts again!

Oh...
The ERG and assorted nutjobs will of course jump on the full ruling where it mentions the ECHR . Of course the pathetic spineless gimp Sunak just threatens to remove the UK from the ECHR in the full knowledge that that would be a major breach of the GFA . And open a Pandora’s box of further problems .

The ERG, of course, examined the Windsor Framework - their assessment at https://lawyersforbritain.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/ERG-Legal-Advisory-Committee-Review-and-Assessment-21-March-2023.pdf makes no mention of Article 2 and how it or any of its provisions might interact with future immigration legislation.

Anabobazina · May 13

148grss said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.
You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.
I think you're wrong on this. I think Trump is doing what he always does - push the limits of what people will let him get away with until norms are broken and he wins. I'm not saying that he wouldn't use jail as an opportunity for martyrdom. But I don't think he wants to be in jail - if he did he could do more flagrant nonsense.

LOL. The last couple of days on here have been stuffed full of wishcasting drivel, yet again. The site is becoming unbearable, like Laura K on acid.

Let us all hope that this latest blunder from CCHQ will check the stream of nonsense that we are subjected to daily on here.

ydoethur · May 13

Stuartinromford said:

ydoethur said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:
I just remarked how many children were in Sainsbury's today, and since it is not half term, presumably they are off sick.
Depends on age. If they were 16 might just have finished their Eng Lit exams (paper 1 was today).
And if 11/12, they might be off school to avoid SATs. (Don't know how much 'parents keeping children away for SATs week is still a thing. Mine is still overjoyed at the free breakfasts the school provides.)

Why oh why do we still have SATs, and why do all parents not take them out to avoid them?

They're the only thing in the known universe more damaging to children's education than Amanda Spielman.

148grss · May 13

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.
If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?
Women are a separate category to men - does that imply they are outside the norm?

It is perfectly easy to say that people have different characteristics and yet it is normal (in a normative as well as statistical sense) for people to have a rare characteristic. It is normal to be ginger, even if it is rare.
No, women are distinct from men, not distinct from the norm. There's a difference.
LGBTQ+ people are distinct from cis het people, not distinct from the norm. There we go.
Which category would you put, e.g. Michael Portillo in?

From his account he defines himself as straight, having had sexual encounters with someone of the same sex.

But I don't really see what this has to do with anything you've said. You said having a separate category implicitly means them being outside the norm - maybe you just meant from a statistical point, but my point was on a normative one. It is normal for someone to talk about their spouse - it shouldn't be considered political if that spouse happens to be same sex. It is normal for people to wear a wedding ring, which announces their relationship status - it shouldn't be considered political if they are married to someone of the same sex. This idea of a rainbow lanyard as somehow beyond the pale - that being openly LGBTQ+ or supportive of LGBTQ+ people is somehow more political than being openly supportive of marriage, for example, is about moral normativity.

Andy_JS · May 13

What are the chances of Trump being convicted of a felony in the next few months?

malcolmg · May 13

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14

Should not be making political statements in the workplace, not acceptable.

wooliedyed · May 13

Andy_JS said:
What are the chances of Trump being convicted of a felony in the next few months?

This trial is the only one likely to happen pre election

malcolmg · May 13

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.
If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?
Women are a separate category to men - does that imply they are outside the norm?

It is perfectly easy to say that people have different characteristics and yet it is normal (in a normative as well as statistical sense) for people to have a rare characteristic. It is normal to be ginger, even if it is rare.
No, women are distinct from men, not distinct from the norm. There's a difference.
LGBTQ+ people are distinct from cis het people, not distinct from the norm. There we go.

NUTTER

Anabobazina · May 13

148grss said:

turbotubbs said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Too early! Twitter is awash with the next bird flu pandemic!

But, yes, I whole heartedly agree. And yet - I am heading to the Discworld convention in August and they are still (as far as I know) planning on asking everyone to mask. Madness.
I mean, masking showed not only a reduction in covid but a lot of other illnesses, including flu. It's not a huge burden to wear a mask, especially at a gathering of lots of people from lots of different areas who are likely using public transport / airplanes etc to get to and from things. I think it's a sign of the times that something not that cumbersome that clearly helps society at large has become such a to do. I don't think everyone needs to wear one all the time - but it makes sense for public transport, the tube, big gatherings, etc.

Er what? You advocate masking in normal settings such as public transport and big gatherings, as a norm?

No.

Masking is horrible and inhumane, given we communicate and bond with our facial expressions. It should be used only in extreme circumstances. The fact that Turbo's conference in August is planning masking is, frankly, bizarre, and more than a little sinister.

148grss · May 13

Anabobazina said:

148grss said:

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

wooliedyed said:

148grss said:

Malmesbury said:
The judge is playing this very carefully.

At this point, with this many violations, repeated and after so many warnings, zero chance of an overturn on appeal.
Yes, but I think this makes it clear how unfair the law is. Anyone else doing this would have been locked up with a bailiff dragging him away and bail set at an astronomical price. Because he's rich and powerful - they haven't. The law shouldn't bend to accommodate him - and that it does is already a loss for the impartiality of the justice system.
There wouldn't be any bail, it would be a criminal sentence for contempt
I meant bail for the trial overall, not just the contempt of court.
You think he should be locked up for an accusation of false accounting without trial that in all likelihood as a first (convicted) offence wont carry any prison time?
If he were being treated like anyone else before a NY court - he would be. He is a clear flight risk, considering his wealth and ability to travel not only between the states but to other countries. He is actively doing witness tampering, and has form for doing witness tampering in the past. And he holds the court in contempt.

Even if he should have had bail at the start of the trial - it should have been revoked for any number of his activities inside and outside of the court since.
You do realize, that Donald Trump WANTS to get his sorry, retched ass thown in jail BEFORE the Election?

Personally do NOT want judge(s) to gratify his quest for martyrdom, at least NOT at this juncture.
I think you're wrong on this. I think Trump is doing what he always does - push the limits of what people will let him get away with until norms are broken and he wins. I'm not saying that he wouldn't use jail as an opportunity for martyrdom. But I don't think he wants to be in jail - if he did he could do more flagrant nonsense.
LOL. The last couple of days on here have been stuffed full of wishcasting drivel, yet again. The site is becoming unbearable, like Laura K on acid.

Let us all hope that this latest blunder from CCHQ will check the stream of nonsense that we are subjected to daily on here.

I don't understand what I said here that is wishcasting? I'm not saying he is going to be put in jail, but I'm saying that if you want people to believe in equality under the law they have to see people being treated equally under the law. And Trump has had a pretty easy time of ignoring the court and flouting his law breaking - in this case and in other areas. That he has been able to do that is bad, and gives him an air of specialness that he doesn't deserve.

ydoethur · May 13

Andy_JS said:
What are the chances of Trump being convicted of a felony in the next few months?

Surely he already has been? Or is this a lower count of contempt that doesn't amount to a felony?

williamglenn · May 13

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.
If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?
Women are a separate category to men - does that imply they are outside the norm?

It is perfectly easy to say that people have different characteristics and yet it is normal (in a normative as well as statistical sense) for people to have a rare characteristic. It is normal to be ginger, even if it is rare.
No, women are distinct from men, not distinct from the norm. There's a difference.
LGBTQ+ people are distinct from cis het people, not distinct from the norm. There we go.
Which category would you put, e.g. Michael Portillo in?
From his account he defines himself as straight, having had sexual encounters with someone of the same sex.

But I don't really see what this has to do with anything you've said. You said having a separate category implicitly means them being outside the norm - maybe you just meant from a statistical point, but my point was on a normative one. It is normal for someone to talk about their spouse - it shouldn't be considered political if that spouse happens to be same sex. It is normal for people to wear a wedding ring, which announces their relationship status - it shouldn't be considered political if they are married to someone of the same sex. This idea of a rainbow lanyard as somehow beyond the pale - that being openly LGBTQ+ or supportive of LGBTQ+ people is somehow more political than being openly supportive of marriage, for example, is about moral normativity.

So you think people can switch from the LGBTQ+ category to the cis het category?

nico679 · May 13

AlsoLei said:

nico679 said:

Benpointer said:

nico679 said:
Belfast high court judge suspends most of the Illegal Migration Act from coming into force in NI as it breaches the Windsor Framework and therefore the GFA .

The wheels are coming off already from the Rwanda plan .

Those bloody foreign courts again!

Oh...
The ERG and assorted nutjobs will of course jump on the full ruling where it mentions the ECHR . Of course the pathetic spineless gimp Sunak just threatens to remove the UK from the ECHR in the full knowledge that that would be a major breach of the GFA . And open a Pandora’s box of further problems .
The ERG, of course, examined the Windsor Framework - their assessment at https://lawyersforbritain.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/ERG-Legal-Advisory-Committee-Review-and-Assessment-21-March-2023.pdf makes no mention of Article 2 and how it or any of its provisions might interact with future immigration legislation.

Was that the alleged Star Chamber of lawyers that the odious Mark Francois referred to with such glee ?

It’s likely to end up in the Supreme Court now regardless of any future Appeals Court Decision .

Sunak can say what he likes but you can’t have this type of legislation only in the UK excluding NI . The government can’t be that stupid ? Or can they . Asylum seekers can get to NI and stay there now . The only way to stop that is for full passport checks at all ports . The DUP will love that !

#Sunak Winning Bigly !!!

malcolmg · May 13

148grss said:

Benpointer said:

148grss said:

Mexicanpete said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Uh, oh!

https://metro.co.uk/2024/05/13/gps-warn-patients-wear-face-masks-whooping-cough-cases-increase-20826771/
I have had a cough now for almost 2 months. Dry cough, catching in my throat, stabbing pain in my chest. Dunno if it's long covid related, but I can't seem to shift it. Very annoying...
I hope you've had that checked out properly.
Nurse a few weeks back said it was likely just viral, but now GP is gonna see me at the end of the week. We shall see

I have been coughing and spluttering, breathing issues and loss of taste for almost a month ( wife similar ) , just finished second course of antibiotics and is finally improving.

148grss · May 13

Anabobazina said:

148grss said:

turbotubbs said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Too early! Twitter is awash with the next bird flu pandemic!

But, yes, I whole heartedly agree. And yet - I am heading to the Discworld convention in August and they are still (as far as I know) planning on asking everyone to mask. Madness.
I mean, masking showed not only a reduction in covid but a lot of other illnesses, including flu. It's not a huge burden to wear a mask, especially at a gathering of lots of people from lots of different areas who are likely using public transport / airplanes etc to get to and from things. I think it's a sign of the times that something not that cumbersome that clearly helps society at large has become such a to do. I don't think everyone needs to wear one all the time - but it makes sense for public transport, the tube, big gatherings, etc.
Er what? You advocate masking in normal settings such as public transport and big gatherings, as a norm?

No.

Masking is horrible and inhumane, given we communicate and bond with our facial expressions. It should be used only in extreme circumstances. The fact that Turbo's conference in August is planning masking is, frankly, bizarre, and more than a little sinister.

Considering Turbo is going to a Discworld convention I think of this conversation between Vetinari and Colon:

“Not natural, in my view, sah. Not in favor of unnatural things.'

Vetinari looked perplexed. 'You mean, you eat your meat raw and sleep in a tree?”

And many countries do mask in public places as a norm, because they are used to increased outbreaks of airborne illness.

malcolmg · May 13

SNP determined to get a thrashing at election , Swinney now doing a Starmer

On BBC GMS, First Minister John Swinney is asked if he believes a trans woman is a woman.

He says: "I believe a woman is an adult female born as a woman, and I also accept that transgender women are defined as women."

148grss · May 13

malcolmg said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Should not be making political statements in the workplace, not acceptable.

Ban all poppies in the office come November - that's a political statement.

geoffw · May 13

There was a tent-city style of protest in the Univ of Barcelona today where our grand-daughter is studying maths. But all was calm and almost civilized despite the placement of some tents on the precious square metres of lawn. Thus I came to understand how efficient the demo was. Because the calmness was due to the fact that the protesters, having made their mark by pitching their tents, were not actually occupying them. Instead they were to be found in the local cafés and tapas bars pursuing their ideals in altogether more agreeable surroundings.

148grss · May 13

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.
If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?
Women are a separate category to men - does that imply they are outside the norm?

It is perfectly easy to say that people have different characteristics and yet it is normal (in a normative as well as statistical sense) for people to have a rare characteristic. It is normal to be ginger, even if it is rare.
No, women are distinct from men, not distinct from the norm. There's a difference.
LGBTQ+ people are distinct from cis het people, not distinct from the norm. There we go.
Which category would you put, e.g. Michael Portillo in?
From his account he defines himself as straight, having had sexual encounters with someone of the same sex.

But I don't really see what this has to do with anything you've said. You said having a separate category implicitly means them being outside the norm - maybe you just meant from a statistical point, but my point was on a normative one. It is normal for someone to talk about their spouse - it shouldn't be considered political if that spouse happens to be same sex. It is normal for people to wear a wedding ring, which announces their relationship status - it shouldn't be considered political if they are married to someone of the same sex. This idea of a rainbow lanyard as somehow beyond the pale - that being openly LGBTQ+ or supportive of LGBTQ+ people is somehow more political than being openly supportive of marriage, for example, is about moral normativity.
So you think people can switch from the LGBTQ+ category to the cis het category?

I mean, that is clearly not what I'm saying, but you clearly have no interest in talking about what I am saying - so I may as well stick my head in a bucket for all it's worth.

TimS · May 13

Fairly silly debate this afternoon, reflecting its origin: the very real silliness of our minister for common sense and her bloke-down-the-pub approach to policy.

williamglenn · May 13

geoffw said:
There was a tent-city style of protest in the Univ of Barcelona today where our grand-daughter is studying maths. But all was calm and almost civilized despite the placement of some tents on the precious square metres of lawn. Thus I came to understand how efficient the demo was. Because the calmness was due to the fact that the protesters, having made their mark by pitching their tents, were not actually occupying them. Instead they were to be found in the local cafés and tapas bars pursuing their ideals in altogether more agreeable surroundings.

Questions need to be asked about the influence of Big Tent.

Jim_the_Lurker · May 13

Benpointer said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Good to see the priority problems the country faces being addressed. You can't go anywhere these days without bumping into someone whose life has been utterly ruined by a coloured lanyard.

Exactly my view - coloured lanyards may or may not be a good thing (and they may or may not be appropriate for work - I err to the side of “I couldn’t give a toss either way”). But of all the things going on in the world Esther McVey found time to ban this! Pointless, gesture politics from a fag-end Government.

kinabalu · May 13

Mexicanpete said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
She has a plan and the plan is working.

Forces Starmer to give his opinion on it - then hey presto we have 'rainbow lanyards in the civil service' as a big election issue, potentially tripping him up as he inches across the shiny floor clutching that ming vase.

kinabalu · May 13

Jim_the_Lurker said:

Benpointer said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Good to see the priority problems the country faces being addressed. You can't go anywhere these days without bumping into someone whose life has been utterly ruined by a coloured lanyard.
Exactly my view - coloured lanyards may or may not be a good thing (and they may or may not be appropriate for work - I err to the side of “I couldn’t give a toss either way”). But of all the things going on in the world Esther McVey found time to ban this! Pointless, gesture politics from a fag-end Government.

The very opposite of 'commonsense' in fact.

williamglenn · May 13

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

williamglenn said:

148grss said:

Taz said:
Shouldn't this be a matter of personal choice, neither imposed by the civil service nor proscribed by HMG?

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/esther-mcvey-announces-civil-service-rainbow-lanyard-ban-in-new-tory-culture-war/ar-BB1mizkr?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=501608b7a97f423482ca0dac1bd3b7a0&ei=14
Stuff like this clearly shows what the Tories would do if they could get away with it, though.

I don't disagree that a pride flag is political, but why is it so? - because LGBTQ+ people had to fight for their rights. Would the suffragette colours similarly be banned for being "political"? Poppies in November? No - because they are the right kind of political. If someone has a photo on their desk showing their cis het family with their kid/s, is that considered "political"? Most people would just say "no, that's normal" - despite the fact that marriage and childrearing are things that are political and politicised (if it was a picture of a same sex couple with a child, or a trans couple with a child, I'm sure many people would argue that would be inappropriate in the workplace). The aim here is clearly define what is normal and what isn't. This says to me, clearly, that McVey views LGBTQ+ people and support for them as not normal.
If you regard LGBTQ+ people as beloning to a separate category then are you not implicitly treating them as outside the norm?
Women are a separate category to men - does that imply they are outside the norm?

It is perfectly easy to say that people have different characteristics and yet it is normal (in a normative as well as statistical sense) for people to have a rare characteristic. It is normal to be ginger, even if it is rare.
No, women are distinct from men, not distinct from the norm. There's a difference.
LGBTQ+ people are distinct from cis het people, not distinct from the norm. There we go.
Which category would you put, e.g. Michael Portillo in?
From his account he defines himself as straight, having had sexual encounters with someone of the same sex.

But I don't really see what this has to do with anything you've said. You said having a separate category implicitly means them being outside the norm - maybe you just meant from a statistical point, but my point was on a normative one. It is normal for someone to talk about their spouse - it shouldn't be considered political if that spouse happens to be same sex. It is normal for people to wear a wedding ring, which announces their relationship status - it shouldn't be considered political if they are married to someone of the same sex. This idea of a rainbow lanyard as somehow beyond the pale - that being openly LGBTQ+ or supportive of LGBTQ+ people is somehow more political than being openly supportive of marriage, for example, is about moral normativity.
So you think people can switch from the LGBTQ+ category to the cis het category?
I mean, that is clearly not what I'm saying, but you clearly have no interest in talking about what I am saying - so I may as well stick my head in a bucket for all it's worth.

You're being evasive.

You have posited that there are two distinct categories: LGBTQ+ and cis het. If Michael Portillo is now cis het, are you saying that he has always been cis het, despite apparently having had multi-year gay relationships, or has he moved from the LGBTQ+ category to the cis het category?

turbotubbs · May 13

148grss said:

turbotubbs said:

Benpointer said:

turbotubbs said:

148grss said:

Stark_Dawning said:
Rishi needs to major on Curry-Gate. Say: 'We've already had one lockdown breaker in Number Ten in the form of Boris and look where that got us. Do we really want to inflict another one on ourselves with this Starmer guy?' The beauty here is that it distances Rishi from the era of Boris's misrule whilst also portraying Sir Keir as Boris's heir. But does Rishi have the chutzpah to go for it?
Nah, 1) that was well in the past, 2) it highlights Johnson and reminds people that Sunak probably stabbed him in the back and 3) Sunak himself probably broke the rules too and if that time comes back in the spotlight he'll have to deal with the findings of the Covid Enquiry which suggest Eat out to Help out killed people and treasury didn't care as long as people spent money.

Voters want to forget lockdown ever happened, not be reminded of it. Being the person to remind them of it, even to make a point in his favour, will make people dislike Sunak even more. I think his only real point of attack is the points he is currently making - that SKS doesn't believe in anything and has no real plans for government - but he fails at this because his government is a group of tired idiots with no plans and he is also clearly just a power hungry bastard too. If the messenger was different and he was better at giving the message, I think the Tories could paint SKS as an empty suit. But it rings hollow atm.
BIB - I did't think the Covid inquiry had reported yet? EOTHO has been linked to an increase in cases in papers and the implication is more cases = more deaths. However at the same time we were importing many more new cases from the continent as we had resumed travel. Like so much of the pandemic it was a trade off. You could keep printing magic money to keep business going while shut for ever, but economically there will be a reckoning. As there is, in fact, now.

But you are right. Go out, eat in a restaurant, go to the cinema, go to a play, or the football. Normal life returned and most people don't want to think about those times again.

Mistakes were made all round. Sadly the Inquiry in traditional British style has been portrayed in the meida far too often as a trial of those in power, rather than a genuine attempt to learn. I hope the report, when it emerges, is more of the latter than the former.
Mrs P. has just thrown out a whole collection of masks she made during the early lock-down days "We'll not be needing these again, thank Christ".
Too early! Twitter is awash with the next bird flu pandemic!

But, yes, I whole heartedly agree. And yet - I am heading to the Discworld convention in August and they are still (as far as I know) planning on asking everyone to mask. Madness.
I mean, masking showed not only a reduction in covid but a lot of other illnesses, including flu. It's not a huge burden to wear a mask, especially at a gathering of lots of people from lots of different areas who are likely using public transport / airplanes etc to get to and from things. I think it's a sign of the times that something not that cumbersome that clearly helps society at large has become such a to do. I don't think everyone needs to wear one all the time - but it makes sense for public transport, the tube, big gatherings, etc.

I disagree. Masks are for clinical settings and clearly work. They should never be for joyous social gatherings. I found wearing one horrific. As humans we rely on seeing each others faces. Masks destroyed that. They had a purpose, but should only ever be needed in extreme cases.

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Categories

Lock him up has majority support – politicalbetting.com

Comments