Hm. Perhaps. I agree there is sub-optimality in this.
But I am frequently out and about on roads. I make about 8 trips a day of various sort - on foot, in a car, by bike. With my kids and alone. And I can't remember the last time I had to worry at all about what a cyclist was doing. Whereas you have to look out for cars all the time. Cyclists have a combined bike-and-rider weight of typically around 100kg and travel at about, let's say, 15mph. Cars weigh at least a tonne and travel at about 30mph. Granted, some cyclists might in extremis go twice as fast as that, but so might some cars. Cars have at least 20 times the momentum of cyclists, and are far, far more common. And they take up more space. Citing cyclists as the ones turning cars into death traps seems a little disingenuous.
The roads around here were getting better, in terms of the whole car thing.
The problem with the furious cyclists (and their brethren the furious ebikers) is that they are using infrastructure for pedestrians (pavements) and for more traditional cyclists (the increasing number of segregated cycle lanes).
If you are in a moderately narrow, segregated cycle lane, say, cruising along at 10mph, and someone is coming towards you at 25mph that is really not an enjoyable experience. When you add in the weight of the ebikes, and the very large boxes the delivery guys add on... You are being approached by an aggressive moped rider, in reality.
A lot of the electric bikes the delivery riders are using should really be classified as mopeds, meaning that the riders need insurance, wear a helmet, and stick to the roads.
A lot of the Chinese stuff comes with an easy way to modify them to remove all restrictions, usually by a method as simple as cutting a wire loop.
A lot of the feeling against cyclists is against delivery drivers, often on electrical bikes dodging around pedestrians at speed. Electric bikes should be treated as mopeds in law.
I think it will end up like that. Ultimately they will replace mopeds (and some cars) in cities and towns over the next 10 years. The growth, particularly in Asia, is insane.
And (reluctant hat tip to Leon, who noticed this first) things like electric tuktuks are filling the taxi gap - they were bizarrely popular in New Zealand, buzzing around little mountain towns.
24 hours after Starmer's big announcement on his priorities and nobody gives a shit.
Is he that bad ?
And Sunak’s big speech on Monday is on everyone’s lips.
This site is getting beyond parody.
Starmer is meant to be the coming man. The Blair of this age. The answer to dishwater dull,
Speak for yourself.
Starmer and his team did pretty well yesterday getting those 6 immediate priorities across. They were duly, individually, listed on a couple of the news outlets that I heard, and got a lot of coverage. I am not usually good at reciting lists, but they stuck in the memory enough that can recite them now, something that I can't say I could do with his earlier equivalent "missions". Boosting economic growth, cutting NHS waiting lists, border security and fighting criminal gangs, tackling anti-social behaviour, more teachers and a publically owned energy company investing in green technology. All accompanied by a bit of spin afterwards about how other stuff not on the list will also happen, just as happened in 1997, I remember the national minimum wage being cited in that context.
By contrast, just like Doug I can't remember what on earth Sunak was on about the day before.
They had 6 priorities none of which amounted to anything much.
Where was house building ? Has it been dropped ?
No, the house building commitment has not been dropped. It's all still there in full detail and will very obviously be there in the manifesto, including a commitment to release "grey belt" land. I think you are reading far too much into a short term pledge card of what are no more than 6 soundbites designed for instant appeal.
Below is the policy link, dating from less than a month ago.
Isn't the pledge card all about smallish, quickish wins- SMARTish targets for the first year or so?
Whereas deconstipating the planning system and getting more Britain built... It's important and the Conservatives aren't going to do it (not with their electorate), but it's not quick.
But if you think the manifesto, or any election campiagn pledge, is a proper promise, I have a bridge to sell you. All we can really do is try to judge character and instincts in advance, and evaluate performance in retrospect.
And that's why the Conservatives are in so much trouble.
I knew some walloper on here would fall for this. "A remarkable 52mph". In a 20mph zone no less!
For context, Bradley Wiggins averaged 33.9mph in a velodrome during a 1 hour time trial. If this embankment cyclist exists, they are perhaps superhuman.
That's over an hour, the scoffers will scoff.
But the world record sprint over 200 m with a flying start is about 9 s. I make that 50 miles per hour. So technically possible, but not plausible. Especially compared with someone... I dunno... having the app on when they weren't cycling?
The Telegraph really is a bloody awful paper these days.
52 downhill is easily achieved but I can't think of any hills feeding in to that stretch
Not really. You'd have to be flying down a steep hill in full lycra, pedalling hard, with the gear range to allow for it.
I'm sure DA has hit speeds like that but I've only ever managed 40mph.
I suspect my bearings would catch fire long before then. Or the brakes that I'd be sqeezing for dear life!
Fastest I've ever done is mid 30s in a 40 and that was fucking terrifying. There's a stretch on my way home that is 20mph limit downhill and I probably routinely exceed that when there's no traffic, but I'm not tracking it - if there are cars I match their pace and that requires some brake use.
FWIW I'd be quite happy with Strava et all being banned from recording speeds over the speed limit on roads (say those with 20mph limits for sure, 30mph limits maybe) to discourage this kind of thing - given a database and required to automatically adjust the recorded speed down to the maximum allowed for motor vehicles or simply not report to reduce the incentive to go faster. The trouble is that you'd probably just get lots of new apps popping up without the restriction and hard to police it.
While there's no speed limit per se on bikes, you can be nicked for cycling carelessly, dangerously or furiously, so the girls and boys in blue could be stopping people taking the piss?
Just wait until the Telegraph finds out about Dragy.
This is f-ing ridiculous. The two main parties are effectively launching their election campaigns even though we are told the GE is not until at least November now.
Just the call the bloody thing.
One would have thought with the economy "going gangbusters" he'd call one.
He'll want interest rates to start coming down, which hasn't happened yet
So it isn't "going gangbusters" just yet. On that criteria (and expected to benefit mortgage borrowers markedly) the next election to be somewhere in early 2028 then.
This is f-ing ridiculous. The two main parties are effectively launching their election campaigns even though we are told the GE is not until at least November now.
Just the call the bloody thing.
One would have thought with the economy "going gangbusters" he'd call one.
He'll want interest rates to start coming down, which hasn't happened yet
So it isn't "going gangbusters" just yet. On that criteria (and expected to benefit mortgage borrowers markedly) the next election to be somewhere in early 2028 then.
He needs to consider savers too, more of them than mortgage holders. I am quite happy with higher for longer.
"New Caledonia riots: parts of territory ‘out of state control’, French representative says Days of unrest in the French Pacific territory – sparked by a plan to change voting rules – have left five dead"
I knew some walloper on here would fall for this. "A remarkable 52mph". In a 20mph zone no less!
For context, Bradley Wiggins averaged 33.9mph in a velodrome during a 1 hour time trial. If this embankment cyclist exists, they are perhaps superhuman.
That's over an hour, the scoffers will scoff.
But the world record sprint over 200 m with a flying start is about 9 s. I make that 50 miles per hour. So technically possible, but not plausible. Especially compared with someone... I dunno... having the app on when they weren't cycling?
The Telegraph really is a bloody awful paper these days.
52 downhill is easily achieved but I can't think of any hills feeding in to that stretch
Not really. You'd have to be flying down a steep hill in full lycra, pedalling hard, with the gear range to allow for it.
I'm sure DA has hit speeds like that but I've only ever managed 40mph.
TdFers have exceeded 100kph. There's one local hill where I max out at 37mph and I think I could go a fair bit faster but for abject fear
The world record for a bicycle is 184mph, one of few outright human performance records held by a woman, Denise Mueller-Korenek
I knew some walloper on here would fall for this. "A remarkable 52mph". In a 20mph zone no less!
For context, Bradley Wiggins averaged 33.9mph in a velodrome during a 1 hour time trial. If this embankment cyclist exists, they are perhaps superhuman.
That's over an hour, the scoffers will scoff.
But the world record sprint over 200 m with a flying start is about 9 s. I make that 50 miles per hour. So technically possible, but not plausible. Especially compared with someone... I dunno... having the app on when they weren't cycling?
The Telegraph really is a bloody awful paper these days.
52 downhill is easily achieved but I can't think of any hills feeding in to that stretch
Not really. You'd have to be flying down a steep hill in full lycra, pedalling hard, with the gear range to allow for it.
I'm sure DA has hit speeds like that but I've only ever managed 40mph.
I suspect my bearings would catch fire long before then. Or the brakes that I'd be sqeezing for dear life!
Fastest I've ever done is mid 30s in a 40 and that was fucking terrifying. There's a stretch on my way home that is 20mph limit downhill and I probably routinely exceed that when there's no traffic, but I'm not tracking it - if there are cars I match their pace and that requires some brake use.
FWIW I'd be quite happy with Strava et all being banned from recording speeds over the speed limit on roads (say those with 20mph limits for sure, 30mph limits maybe) to discourage this kind of thing - given a database and required to automatically adjust the recorded speed down to the maximum allowed for motor vehicles or simply not report to reduce the incentive to go faster. The trouble is that you'd probably just get lots of new apps popping up without the restriction and hard to police it.
While there's no speed limit per se on bikes, you can be nicked for cycling carelessly, dangerously or furiously, so the girls and boys in blue could be stopping people taking the piss?
Just wait until the Telegraph finds out about Dragy.
You can get those in the UK?
Yeah, you can order them direct from the manufacturer. They have online leaderboards now to encourage hooning. I had the 100-200km/h Mk.5 GTI #1 spot for a while.
Post Office inquiry delayed by computer system crash.
Honestly, you couldn't make it up.
Btw, if you are having difficulty reconciling the assured performance of Alisdair Campbell before the Inquiry with his self-evident role at the heart of the Scandal, it may help you to know that he was previously an Arthur Andersen man.
I knew some walloper on here would fall for this. "A remarkable 52mph". In a 20mph zone no less!
For context, Bradley Wiggins averaged 33.9mph in a velodrome during a 1 hour time trial. If this embankment cyclist exists, they are perhaps superhuman.
That's over an hour, the scoffers will scoff.
But the world record sprint over 200 m with a flying start is about 9 s. I make that 50 miles per hour. So technically possible, but not plausible. Especially compared with someone... I dunno... having the app on when they weren't cycling?
The Telegraph really is a bloody awful paper these days.
52 downhill is easily achieved but I can't think of any hills feeding in to that stretch
Not really. You'd have to be flying down a steep hill in full lycra, pedalling hard, with the gear range to allow for it.
I'm sure DA has hit speeds like that but I've only ever managed 40mph.
I suspect my bearings would catch fire long before then. Or the brakes that I'd be sqeezing for dear life!
Fastest I've ever done is mid 30s in a 40 and that was fucking terrifying. There's a stretch on my way home that is 20mph limit downhill and I probably routinely exceed that when there's no traffic, but I'm not tracking it - if there are cars I match their pace and that requires some brake use.
FWIW I'd be quite happy with Strava et all being banned from recording speeds over the speed limit on roads (say those with 20mph limits for sure, 30mph limits maybe) to discourage this kind of thing - given a database and required to automatically adjust the recorded speed down to the maximum allowed for motor vehicles or simply not report to reduce the incentive to go faster. The trouble is that you'd probably just get lots of new apps popping up without the restriction and hard to police it.
While there's no speed limit per se on bikes, you can be nicked for cycling carelessly, dangerously or furiously, so the girls and boys in blue could be stopping people taking the piss?
Just wait until the Telegraph finds out about Dragy.
You can get those in the UK?
Yeah, you can order them direct from the manufacturer. They have online leaderboards now to encourage hooning. I had the 100-200km/h Mk.5 GTI #1 spot for a while.
Because you were in an M5 but saying it was a GTI?
This is f-ing ridiculous. The two main parties are effectively launching their election campaigns even though we are told the GE is not until at least November now.
Just the call the bloody thing.
One would have thought with the economy "going gangbusters" he'd call one.
He'll want interest rates to start coming down, which hasn't happened yet
So it isn't "going gangbusters" just yet. On that criteria (and expected to benefit mortgage borrowers markedly) the next election to be somewhere in early 2028 then.
He needs to consider savers too, more of them than mortgage holders. I am quite happy with higher for longer.
Also mortgage rates have been reducing this week.
I think it was pointed out the other day that the average person has £11,000 in savings but the average mortgage is £180k. So savers are pocketing £550 a year at 5% interest rates (otherwise known as "barely as much as stuff is going up in price in the shops") while anyone remortgaging from 2.5% to 5% is out an additional £3k a year in repayments on a 25 year mortgage.
Eyewitnesses said Foster had not pointed his weapon. (Foster’s weapon had the safety on and no cartridge in the chamber, so it wouldn’t even have made sense for Foster to point his weapon.)
Perry had run a red light to drive his car into the protest. He had previously repeatedly talked of going to shoot protesters, of wanting to shoot Muslims… oh, and had also been sexting a 16 year old.
Pretty disgusting. Carrying while black ought not to give carte blanche to murder.
The victim pointed a gun at the man who shot him.
Perry claimed that Foster pointed his gun at him. Eyewitnesses said otherwise.
If there was evidence that the victim pointed a gun surely a Texas jury wouldn't have convicted on the basis of self defence.
IIRC Perry actually claimed that he thought that Foster was *about* to point the gun at him.
At trial, he claimed Foster had pointed his gun at him, but, yes, what he’d said in his police interview is: "I believe he was going to aim it at me … I didn’t want to give him a chance to aim at me, you know."
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
I knew some walloper on here would fall for this. "A remarkable 52mph". In a 20mph zone no less!
For context, Bradley Wiggins averaged 33.9mph in a velodrome during a 1 hour time trial. If this embankment cyclist exists, they are perhaps superhuman.
That's over an hour, the scoffers will scoff.
But the world record sprint over 200 m with a flying start is about 9 s. I make that 50 miles per hour. So technically possible, but not plausible. Especially compared with someone... I dunno... having the app on when they weren't cycling?
The Telegraph really is a bloody awful paper these days.
52 downhill is easily achieved but I can't think of any hills feeding in to that stretch
Not really. You'd have to be flying down a steep hill in full lycra, pedalling hard, with the gear range to allow for it.
I'm sure DA has hit speeds like that but I've only ever managed 40mph.
I suspect my bearings would catch fire long before then. Or the brakes that I'd be sqeezing for dear life!
Fastest I've ever done is mid 30s in a 40 and that was fucking terrifying. There's a stretch on my way home that is 20mph limit downhill and I probably routinely exceed that when there's no traffic, but I'm not tracking it - if there are cars I match their pace and that requires some brake use.
FWIW I'd be quite happy with Strava et all being banned from recording speeds over the speed limit on roads (say those with 20mph limits for sure, 30mph limits maybe) to discourage this kind of thing - given a database and required to automatically adjust the recorded speed down to the maximum allowed for motor vehicles or simply not report to reduce the incentive to go faster. The trouble is that you'd probably just get lots of new apps popping up without the restriction and hard to police it.
While there's no speed limit per se on bikes, you can be nicked for cycling carelessly, dangerously or furiously, so the girls and boys in blue could be stopping people taking the piss?
I'm slightly wary of things like strava which try to gamify my activities and motivate me with stats. I feel like my human psychological wiring is being exploited for someone's gain, and I can't work out whose. Just enjoy a bike ride for it's own sake!
[Sits back, clicking periodically to check for likes and replies.]
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
This is f-ing ridiculous. The two main parties are effectively launching their election campaigns even though we are told the GE is not until at least November now.
Just the call the bloody thing.
One would have thought with the economy "going gangbusters" he'd call one.
He'll want interest rates to start coming down, which hasn't happened yet
So it isn't "going gangbusters" just yet. On that criteria (and expected to benefit mortgage borrowers markedly) the next election to be somewhere in early 2028 then.
He needs to consider savers too, more of them than mortgage holders. I am quite happy with higher for longer.
Also mortgage rates have been reducing this week.
Yes instead of a renewal going from 1% to 4.7% it will increase to just 4.3%. Bargain!
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
This is f-ing ridiculous. The two main parties are effectively launching their election campaigns even though we are told the GE is not until at least November now.
Just the call the bloody thing.
One would have thought with the economy "going gangbusters" he'd call one.
He'll want interest rates to start coming down, which hasn't happened yet
So it isn't "going gangbusters" just yet. On that criteria (and expected to benefit mortgage borrowers markedly) the next election to be somewhere in early 2028 then.
He needs to consider savers too, more of them than mortgage holders. I am quite happy with higher for longer.
Also mortgage rates have been reducing this week.
Yes instead of a renewal going from 1% to 4.7% it will increase to just 4.3%. Bargain!
With the greatest will in the world, and I say this as someone renewing next March mortgages were never going to stay at 1% forever. Truss catalysed the rate hikes earlier than the counterfactual of what a Hunt chancellorship would have achieved, but we're probably where we'd have been at anyway now.
As did Bush Senior really. He lost the next election primarily due to an economic recession thing and seeing part of his vote split to Ross Perot, while still getting quite high approval rates.
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
Paula Vennells vs Jason Beer, is going to be up there with Tyson Fury vs Olexander Usyk.
This is f-ing ridiculous. The two main parties are effectively launching their election campaigns even though we are told the GE is not until at least November now.
Just the call the bloody thing.
One would have thought with the economy "going gangbusters" he'd call one.
He'll want interest rates to start coming down, which hasn't happened yet
So it isn't "going gangbusters" just yet. On that criteria (and expected to benefit mortgage borrowers markedly) the next election to be somewhere in early 2028 then.
He needs to consider savers too, more of them than mortgage holders. I am quite happy with higher for longer.
Also mortgage rates have been reducing this week.
Yes instead of a renewal going from 1% to 4.7% it will increase to just 4.3%. Bargain!
With the greatest will in the world, and I say this as someone renewing next March mortgages were never going to stay at 1% forever. Truss catalysed the rate hikes earlier than the counterfactual of what a Hunt chancellorship would have achieved, but we're probably where we'd have been at anyway now.
Very true. Are mortgage holders going to be as acquiescent as you, take it on the chin and vote Tory? Or will they punish Truss and Sunak for their role in destabilising mortgage markets ?
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
I am currently pondering spending £25 on the Fury-Usyk fight (underwhelming undercard tbh apart from Opetaia Briedis). I would, however, sign up to Beer-Vennells in a heartbeat. Someone said it should be a national holiday.
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
I am currently pondering spending £25 on the Fury-Usyk fight (underwhelming undercard tbh apart from Opetaia Briedis). I would, however, sign up to Beer-Vennells in a heartbeat. Someone said it should be a national holiday.
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
Paula Vennells vs Jason Beer, is going to be up there with Tyson Fury vs Olexander Usyk.
I think it's more likely to be one of those no hopers v Mike Tyson fights I remember from my youth...
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
Paula Vennells vs Jason Beer, is going to be up there with Tyson Fury vs Olexander Usyk.
I think it's more likely to be one of those no hopers v Mike Tyson fights I remember from my youth...
Marvis Frazier - son of Joe Frazier - was probably the worst one of those.
Even the commentators were saying about how much of a mismatch it was, and I made it 24” between the opening bell and Frazier hitting the deck unconscious.
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
Johnson was flying high, inventing vaccines and saving and beating the world. Blair would have struggled as LOTO. As soon as it unravelled for Johnson, Starmer had his opportunity. The results have been mixed, but on balance. He isn't PM yet, or necessarily ever, I don't believe. PB Tories are however suggesting he's already a crap PM, get rid.
24 hours after Starmer's big announcement on his priorities and nobody gives a shit.
Is he that bad ?
And Sunak’s big speech on Monday is on everyone’s lips.
This site is getting beyond parody.
Starmer is meant to be the coming man. The Blair of this age. The answer to dishwater dull,
Speak for yourself.
Starmer and his team did pretty well yesterday getting those 6 immediate priorities across. They were duly, individually, listed on a couple of the news outlets that I heard, and got a lot of coverage. I am not usually good at reciting lists, but they stuck in the memory enough that can recite them now, something that I can't say I could do with his earlier equivalent "missions". Boosting economic growth, cutting NHS waiting lists, border security and fighting criminal gangs, tackling anti-social behaviour, more teachers and a publically owned energy company investing in green technology. All accompanied by a bit of spin afterwards about how other stuff not on the list will also happen, just as happened in 1997, I remember the national minimum wage being cited in that context.
By contrast, just like Doug I can't remember what on earth Sunak was on about the day before.
They had 6 priorities none of which amounted to anything much.
Where was house building ? Has it been dropped ?
No, the house building commitment has not been dropped. It's all still there in full detail and will very obviously be there in the manifesto, including a commitment to release "grey belt" land. I think you are reading far too much into a short term pledge card of what are no more than 6 soundbites designed for instant appeal.
Below is the policy link, dating from less than a month ago.
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
Johnson was flying high, inventing vaccines and saving and beating the world. Blair would have struggled as LOTO. As soon as it unravelled for Johnson, Starmer had his opportunity. The results have been mixed, but on balance. He isn't PM yet, or ever. I don't believe , as PB Tories are suggesting he's already a crap PM, get rid.
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
Johnson was flying high, inventing vaccines and saving and beating the world. Blair would have struggled as LOTO. As soon as it unravelled for Johnson, Starmer had his opportunity. The results have been mixed, but on balance. He isn't PM yet, or ever. I don't believe , as PB Tories are suggesting he's already a crap PM, get rid.
Blair was LOTO for nearly 3 years.
Unless you meant that even Blair would have struggled as LOTO against Johnson? If so, sorry for my misunderstanding.
Post Office inquiry delayed by computer system crash.
Honestly, you couldn't make it up.
Btw, if you are having difficulty reconciling the assured performance of Alisdair Campbell before the Inquiry with his self-evident role at the heart of the Scandal, it may help you to know that he was previously an Arthur Andersen man.
This is f-ing ridiculous. The two main parties are effectively launching their election campaigns even though we are told the GE is not until at least November now.
Just the call the bloody thing.
One would have thought with the economy "going gangbusters" he'd call one.
He'll want interest rates to start coming down, which hasn't happened yet
So it isn't "going gangbusters" just yet. On that criteria (and expected to benefit mortgage borrowers markedly) the next election to be somewhere in early 2028 then.
He needs to consider savers too, more of them than mortgage holders. I am quite happy with higher for longer.
Also mortgage rates have been reducing this week.
I think it was pointed out the other day that the average person has £11,000 in savings but the average mortgage is £180k. So savers are pocketing £550 a year at 5% interest rates (otherwise known as "barely as much as stuff is going up in price in the shops") while anyone remortgaging from 2.5% to 5% is out an additional £3k a year in repayments on a 25 year mortgage.
But for savers they would rather have £550 a year at 5% interest rates than £275 a year at 2.5% interest rates.
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
Johnson was flying high, inventing vaccines and saving and beating the world. Blair would have struggled as LOTO. As soon as it unravelled for Johnson, Starmer had his opportunity. The results have been mixed, but on balance. He isn't PM yet, or ever. I don't believe , as PB Tories are suggesting he's already a crap PM, get rid.
Blair was LOTO for nearly 3 years.
Unless you meant that even Blair would have struggled as LOTO against Johnson? If so, sorry for my misunderstanding.
That's what I meant. Under the circumstances of Johnson being seen as the saviour of the nation under COVID anyone else would have struggled to keep up.
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
You need a minimum of 3 A grades to get into Toppings list but St Andrew’s and Durham are the go to places for the privately educated simply because Oxbridge restrict numbers and Durham doesn’t care
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
This is not quite fair. Starmer thus far has done everything right from a pragmatic and personal point of view.
He has supported a left Labour party and ensured that it never won an election while he would not have become the Prime Minister.
He was leftish/Remainery while necessary - up to and including being elected leader, by a mile on first round, following the personally satisfactory 2019 defeat.
He has lost the support of the ultra left - the ones he needs to lose in order to attract 2 million Tory votes - and gained millions of new voters by placing himself in the social democrat centre left and abandoning his old friends.
He has made his, previously unelectable, party look like the natural party of government.
It is obvious that he wants to win 2 elections at least, and it is obvious that he will do whatever is required to do so. As this involves moderation, a limited degree of honesty, small and deliverable promises, and competence that is what he will try to do.
He, and it, could all be a great deal worse. he has earned the public's patience.
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
A bit unfair.
Starmer spent most of 2020 grinding the Conservative lead down to near-parity by December 2020. Bozza got a hefty bounce from the vaccine and the stone that Starmer had been patiently rolling up the hill rolled back and squashed him again.
One of the things that has persuaded me that SKS has the right stuff is that he kept buggering on, and rolled the stone up the hill again. From about June 2021, voters swung blue-to-red at a fairly steady rate; the scandals and Trusstershambles were just the unpleasant icing on the cake.
Wonder what drove that turning point three years ago?
This is f-ing ridiculous. The two main parties are effectively launching their election campaigns even though we are told the GE is not until at least November now.
Just the call the bloody thing.
One would have thought with the economy "going gangbusters" he'd call one.
He'll want interest rates to start coming down, which hasn't happened yet
So it isn't "going gangbusters" just yet. On that criteria (and expected to benefit mortgage borrowers markedly) the next election to be somewhere in early 2028 then.
He needs to consider savers too, more of them than mortgage holders. I am quite happy with higher for longer.
Also mortgage rates have been reducing this week.
I think it was pointed out the other day that the average person has £11,000 in savings but the average mortgage is £180k. So savers are pocketing £550 a year at 5% interest rates (otherwise known as "barely as much as stuff is going up in price in the shops") while anyone remortgaging from 2.5% to 5% is out an additional £3k a year in repayments on a 25 year mortgage.
But for savers they would rather have £550 a year at 5% interest rates than £275 a year at 2.5% interest rates.
Truflation estimates that inflation was running at around 16% last year. So all 5% from the bank means is you're losing purchasing power slightly slower.
Aside from that, who is more likely to be more motivated to vote on this as an issue - someone making an extra £275 a year from savings, or someone staring at a £3k a year or (or more - I was conservative in choosing 2.5% as a starting point, many were on sub 2% deals) extra cash they have to find, just to keep the roof over their head?
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
I am currently pondering spending £25 on the Fury-Usyk fight (underwhelming undercard tbh apart from Opetaia Briedis). I would, however, sign up to Beer-Vennells in a heartbeat. Someone said it should be a national holiday.
Arguably glowing references are not always an indicator of great work. Organisations who want people gone will often ensure a goof reference. Uni's do this a lot.
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
You need a minimum of 3 A grades to get into Toppings list but St Andrew’s and Durham are the go to places for the privately educated simply because Oxbridge restrict numbers and Durham doesn’t care
Durham is seen as being extremely academically demanding. If that's what you mean.
Eyewitnesses said Foster had not pointed his weapon. (Foster’s weapon had the safety on and no cartridge in the chamber, so it wouldn’t even have made sense for Foster to point his weapon.)
Perry had run a red light to drive his car into the protest. He had previously repeatedly talked of going to shoot protesters, of wanting to shoot Muslims… oh, and had also been sexting a 16 year old.
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
I am currently pondering spending £25 on the Fury-Usyk fight (underwhelming undercard tbh apart from Opetaia Briedis). I would, however, sign up to Beer-Vennells in a heartbeat. Someone said it should be a national holiday.
Arguably glowing references are not always an indicator of great work. Organisations who want people gone will often ensure a goof reference. Uni's do this a lot.
Isn't there a law about "references" which can't say anything of value or useful at all.
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
I'm not sure I agree. I think the polling is a combo of Con implosion and people believing Labour are no longer a) Corbynite or b) soft on antisemitism (I realise sooner might argue these are the same thing).
On the latter Starmer has worked wonders, especially as he was ostensibly a Corbynite. And I suspect in political terms (a) is pretty incompatible with having a strong left of centre vision for the future, so that will have to wait.
24 hours after Starmer's big announcement on his priorities and nobody gives a shit.
Is he that bad ?
And Sunak’s big speech on Monday is on everyone’s lips.
This site is getting beyond parody.
Starmer is meant to be the coming man. The Blair of this age. The answer to dishwater dull,
Speak for yourself.
Starmer and his team did pretty well yesterday getting those 6 immediate priorities across. They were duly, individually, listed on a couple of the news outlets that I heard, and got a lot of coverage. I am not usually good at reciting lists, but they stuck in the memory enough that can recite them now, something that I can't say I could do with his earlier equivalent "missions". Boosting economic growth, cutting NHS waiting lists, border security and fighting criminal gangs, tackling anti-social behaviour, more teachers and a publically owned energy company investing in green technology. All accompanied by a bit of spin afterwards about how other stuff not on the list will also happen, just as happened in 1997, I remember the national minimum wage being cited in that context.
By contrast, just like Doug I can't remember what on earth Sunak was on about the day before.
They had 6 priorities none of which amounted to anything much.
Where was house building ? Has it been dropped ?
No, the house building commitment has not been dropped. It's all still there in full detail and will very obviously be there in the manifesto, including a commitment to release "grey belt" land. I think you are reading far too much into a short term pledge card of what are no more than 6 soundbites designed for instant appeal.
Below is the policy link, dating from less than a month ago.
Isn't the pledge card all about smallish, quickish wins- SMARTish targets for the first year or so?
Whereas deconstipating the planning system and getting more Britain built... It's important and the Conservatives aren't going to do it (not with their electorate), but it's not quick.
But if you think the manifesto, or any election campiagn pledge, is a proper promise, I have a bridge to sell you. All we can really do is try to judge character and instincts in advance, and evaluate performance in retrospect.
And that's why the Conservatives are in so much trouble.
Pledge cards are of course for show, but manifestos do matter. They do give a good idea of where a party's "instincts" are. At the moment there's so much more emphasis on Labour housing policy than in the build ups to previous elections, so that is going find its way into the manifesto and I think needs to be taken seriously. Manifestos also matter because the inclusion of a policy in a manifesto limits the ability of the House of Lords to block legislation, as the Salisbury convention ultimately kicks in. That's a particularly important consideration for a party with such little representation in the Lords.
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
Paula Vennells vs Jason Beer, is going to be up there with Tyson Fury vs Olexander Usyk.
I think it's more likely to be one of those no hopers v Mike Tyson fights I remember from my youth...
Marvis Frazier - son of Joe Frazier - was probably the worst one of those.
Even the commentators were saying about how much of a mismatch it was, and I made it 24” between the opening bell and Frazier hitting the deck unconscious.
IIRC that was the one that was in the wee hours over here - one local pub had got a special license, charged for tickets and then had to deal with the upset customers who'd paid a fair bit to see 30 seconds...
Eyewitnesses said Foster had not pointed his weapon. (Foster’s weapon had the safety on and no cartridge in the chamber, so it wouldn’t even have made sense for Foster to point his weapon.)
Perry had run a red light to drive his car into the protest. He had previously repeatedly talked of going to shoot protesters, of wanting to shoot Muslims… oh, and had also been sexting a 16 year old.
The pardon looks like pure dogwhistle to me.
It is exactly what the header is talking about. Texan GOP politicians are more interested in pandering to racists than in governing.
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
I am currently pondering spending £25 on the Fury-Usyk fight (underwhelming undercard tbh apart from Opetaia Briedis). I would, however, sign up to Beer-Vennells in a heartbeat. Someone said it should be a national holiday.
Arguably glowing references are not always an indicator of great work. Organisations who want people gone will often ensure a goof reference. Uni's do this a lot.
Isn't there a law about "references" which can't say anything of value or useful at all.
Not so much law as the combined secondary effects of various laws. In a number of companies I have worked at, managers are forbidden to give personal references. Because companies have got into legal trouble - the claim was that since the manager was working for company X, he was speaking for company X, even when he wrote "this is purely a personal reference".
So many references are a statement from HR that "Y worked at this company between these date, with job title Z".
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
Johnson was flying high, inventing vaccines and saving and beating the world. Blair would have struggled as LOTO. As soon as it unravelled for Johnson, Starmer had his opportunity. The results have been mixed, but on balance. He isn't PM yet, or ever. I don't believe , as PB Tories are suggesting he's already a crap PM, get rid.
Blair was LOTO for nearly 3 years.
Unless you meant that even Blair would have struggled as LOTO against Johnson? If so, sorry for my misunderstanding.
That's what I meant. Under the circumstances of Johnson being seen as the saviour of the nation under COVID anyone else would have struggled to keep up.
That’s not quite accurate. The government came in for lots of flak during the pandemic - I don’t think there was anything like that level of adulation for Johnson.
Starmer slipped up during COVID because there was a level of appreciation from the public that this was a difficult time, and he was often too quick to criticise and oppose for the sake of it. He came across at rather uncharitable.
He has got smarter at that game. He’s still very ready to criticise the government (which is an easy win nowadays) but he is also better at triangulating and moderating his criticisms.
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
I wonder why.
The problem with UK society is that it hugely advantages those who are rather posh but slightly dim while severely disadvantages those who are oiks but super bright.
Not in formal terms - ie riches, rewards, etc - but in the horrible, debilitating, and ineluctable sense of inferiority and insecurity we see so often in that latter group.
24 hours after Starmer's big announcement on his priorities and nobody gives a shit.
Is he that bad ?
And Sunak’s big speech on Monday is on everyone’s lips.
This site is getting beyond parody.
Starmer is meant to be the coming man. The Blair of this age. The answer to dishwater dull,
Speak for yourself.
Starmer and his team did pretty well yesterday getting those 6 immediate priorities across. They were duly, individually, listed on a couple of the news outlets that I heard, and got a lot of coverage. I am not usually good at reciting lists, but they stuck in the memory enough that can recite them now, something that I can't say I could do with his earlier equivalent "missions". Boosting economic growth, cutting NHS waiting lists, border security and fighting criminal gangs, tackling anti-social behaviour, more teachers and a publically owned energy company investing in green technology. All accompanied by a bit of spin afterwards about how other stuff not on the list will also happen, just as happened in 1997, I remember the national minimum wage being cited in that context.
By contrast, just like Doug I can't remember what on earth Sunak was on about the day before.
They had 6 priorities none of which amounted to anything much.
Where was house building ? Has it been dropped ?
No, the house building commitment has not been dropped. It's all still there in full detail and will very obviously be there in the manifesto, including a commitment to release "grey belt" land. I think you are reading far too much into a short term pledge card of what are no more than 6 soundbites designed for instant appeal.
Below is the policy link, dating from less than a month ago.
Isn't the pledge card all about smallish, quickish wins- SMARTish targets for the first year or so?
Whereas deconstipating the planning system and getting more Britain built... It's important and the Conservatives aren't going to do it (not with their electorate), but it's not quick.
But if you think the manifesto, or any election campiagn pledge, is a proper promise, I have a bridge to sell you. All we can really do is try to judge character and instincts in advance, and evaluate performance in retrospect.
And that's why the Conservatives are in so much trouble.
The "Labour's first steps" branding was quite clever, I thought. Not quite as restrictive as the 'first hundred days' thing that politicians love to obsess about, but still simple and easy to grasp.
Perhaps the "deliver economic stability" is a bit weak, as it's just a pledge to not deliberately crash the economy or go on a massive unfunded spending spree - but the other five are all concrete targets, and you can see how they might quickly go about meeting them.
And, importantly, they invite comparison with the top priorities of the current govt in the 6-8 months they have left - which appear to be: 1) Ban foreign students, 2) Ban tents, 3) Ban rainbows
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
I am currently pondering spending £25 on the Fury-Usyk fight (underwhelming undercard tbh apart from Opetaia Briedis). I would, however, sign up to Beer-Vennells in a heartbeat. Someone said it should be a national holiday.
Arguably glowing references are not always an indicator of great work. Organisations who want people gone will often ensure a goof reference. Uni's do this a lot.
Isn't there a law about "references" which can't say anything of value or useful at all.
It is possible to be legally liable for what you say, or omit to say, in a reference. Therefore you have three big areas of problem: Good references, bad references, and silent references. That is, all references.
It is entirely understandable that people who don't have to provide them don't. Gossip in the pub, guesswork, unattributable remarks, and phone calls that did not take place are significant bits of currency.
Employment lawyers have starving wives and children to feed and clothe. Eton doesn't pay for itself.
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
You need a minimum of 3 A grades to get into Toppings list but St Andrew’s and Durham are the go to places for the privately educated simply because Oxbridge restrict numbers and Durham doesn’t care
Durham is seen as being extremely academically demanding. If that's what you mean.
All of the universities mentioned are now academically demanding. It's kinda a market function - they raise the grades required until the number of applications is reduced to a manageable level.
One thing that has changed dramatically in the last 20 years or so, is the way that a big tranche of private schools have become hard core education mills. There are enough rich parents of smart children to fill them many times over - especially when you consider the overseas cohorts.
Which is why private schools over achieve in places at various universities. If you want 4 As at A*, private is where they are turning them out.
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
This is not quite fair. Starmer thus far has done everything right from a pragmatic and personal point of view.
He has supported a left Labour party and ensured that it never won an election while he would not have become the Prime Minister.
He was leftish/Remainery while necessary - up to and including being elected leader, by a mile on first round, following the personally satisfactory 2019 defeat.
He has lost the support of the ultra left - the ones he needs to lose in order to attract 2 million Tory votes - and gained millions of new voters by placing himself in the social democrat centre left and abandoning his old friends.
He has made his, previously unelectable, party look like the natural party of government.
It is obvious that he wants to win 2 elections at least, and it is obvious that he will do whatever is required to do so. As this involves moderation, a limited degree of honesty, small and deliverable promises, and competence that is what he will try to do.
He, and it, could all be a great deal worse. he has earned the public's patience.
By and large those who assured us that Brexit/Johnson/Truss/Sunak would be hugely successful are the very same people that are assuring us that Starmer will be a disaster. Fool me once...
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
Johnson was flying high, inventing vaccines and saving and beating the world. Blair would have struggled as LOTO. As soon as it unravelled for Johnson, Starmer had his opportunity. The results have been mixed, but on balance. He isn't PM yet, or necessarily ever, I don't believe. PB Tories are however suggesting he's already a crap PM, get rid.
I see what you are saying, but I do think that people sometimes think 1994-97 was easy for Blair simply because he made it look easy - Kinnock had done a lot of the hard yards in detoxifying the Labour Party, Black Wednesday in 1992 was a terrible blow to the Tories (who'd been in a very long time), and Blair inherited a good poll lead from Smith.
But there's a trap in thinking that things that happened 1994-97 were inevitable. The economy was recovering well, Major had faced down Redwood and the rebels, the cabinet had some heavy hitters to a far greater extent than now, and there was still a threat from Blair's left. That those never came close to translating into a real Tory recovery or Labour schism is a testament to Blair's political skill - he never allowed the Tories to get any traction.
Would Blair have struggled against Johnson in 2020/21? Certainly more than he did against Major. But probably a good deal less than Starmer did against Johnson. That's not necessarily a criticism of Starmer - he has many qualities and may well be a better PM than Blair was. But Blair was a very effective politician - he was a showman, had a very good idea of how people's minds work, transformed the central office machine, and on the basic level had good judgment on what would fly politically and what wouldn't. It doesn't mean his policies were right - that's a different question.
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
Paula Vennells vs Jason Beer, is going to be up there with Tyson Fury vs Olexander Usyk.
I think it's more likely to be one of those no hopers v Mike Tyson fights I remember from my youth...
Marvis Frazier - son of Joe Frazier - was probably the worst one of those.
Even the commentators were saying about how much of a mismatch it was, and I made it 24” between the opening bell and Frazier hitting the deck unconscious.
IIRC that was the one that was in the wee hours over here - one local pub had got a special license, charged for tickets and then had to deal with the upset customers who'd paid a fair bit to see 30 seconds...
That’s always a risk on fight night.
I was in my local pub yesterday and asked them if they’ll be showing the fight tomorrow. The landlord’s replay was that if it starts before they close - 3am local time, midnight UK time - they’ll show it, but that the last Saudi fight ran late. So my plan is to hope it’s on at the pub, and be prepared to run 100 yards home and pay $20 for the local PPV otherwise.
Interesting to see that Betfair punters are evenly split on the winner, but think Fury wins by stoppage and Usyk by decision.
Gallipoli - not that one - on the Ionian coast of puglia. An entire walled town on an island connected by a fortified bridge with Aragonese walls everywhere
Probably it is rammed in high summer but in May in blazing sun there is one small street of tourist tat and the rest is tiny alleyways with the smell of new washing and fried fish and men in string vests either bursting into opera or arguing obscurely but furiously with the neighbours (two feet away) in explosive pugliese
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
I wonder why.
The problem with UK society is that it hugely advantages those who are rather posh but slightly dim while severely disadvantages those who are oiks but super bright.
Not in formal terms - ie riches, rewards, etc - but in the horrible, debilitating, and ineluctable sense of inferiority and insecurity we see so often in that latter group.
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
Paula Vennells vs Jason Beer, is going to be up there with Tyson Fury vs Olexander Usyk.
I think it's more likely to be one of those no hopers v Mike Tyson fights I remember from my youth...
Marvis Frazier - son of Joe Frazier - was probably the worst one of those.
Even the commentators were saying about how much of a mismatch it was, and I made it 24” between the opening bell and Frazier hitting the deck unconscious.
IIRC that was the one that was in the wee hours over here - one local pub had got a special license, charged for tickets and then had to deal with the upset customers who'd paid a fair bit to see 30 seconds...
That’s always a risk on fight night.
I was in my local pub yesterday and asked them if they’ll be showing the fight tomorrow. The landlord’s replay was that if it starts before they close - 3am local time, midnight UK time - they’ll show it, but that the last Saudi fight ran late. So my plan is to hope it’s on at the pub, and be prepared to run 100 yards home and pay $20 for the local PPV otherwise.
Interesting to see that Betfair punters are evenly split on the winner, but think Fury wins by stoppage and Usyk by decision.
It's actually fascinating. You saw my post the other day I know. Here it is again for those who weren't paying attention:
Usyk: heavy cruiserweight rather than proper heavyweight hence light on his feet (!) but no knockout power. Will likely dance around Fury for the first few rounds to see if Fury can hurt him (he probably can but himself is not a puncher) and try to land some body shots and then in the later rounds, if fitness comes into it, he will try to land the kind of shots he is known for (AJ, Dubois) racking up the points.
Fury: will be trying to throw Usyk round like a rag doll, leaning, smothering him, manhandling him and trying to drain Usyk's energy just keeping him off. Then will look for a decent shot or three to impress the judges, perhaps he looks to put Usyk down. Nothing out of the camps which is unusual which might mean he is training seriously. Ngannou's Fury gets beat "easily".
So with bf calling it just about even but favouring Fury (2.08 vs 2.14, which I put down to the home crowd) it's anyone's fight and should be fascinating and worth the £25 even though the undercard isn't mesmerising - I like the Opetaia Breidis fight.
So my call? Usyk. Not just because I like him (everyone likes him) and am meh towards TF but because Fury has always been called "the boxer" and Usyk can outbox him. If he has enough energy left having been leant on for eight straight rounds.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
I wonder why.
The problem with UK society is that it hugely advantages those who are rather posh but slightly dim while severely disadvantages those who are oiks but super bright.
Not in formal terms - ie riches, rewards, etc - but in the horrible, debilitating, and ineluctable sense of inferiority and insecurity we see so often in that latter group.
"It's not for the likes of us."
It's a shame and I'm not proud of it. It leads people to overcompensate while realising that they are out of their depth and hoping no one will notice and is wholly unedifying.
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
You need a minimum of 3 A grades to get into Toppings list but St Andrew’s and Durham are the go to places for the privately educated simply because Oxbridge restrict numbers and Durham doesn’t care
Durham is seen as being extremely academically demanding. If that's what you mean.
All of the universities mentioned are now academically demanding. It's kinda a market function - they raise the grades required until the number of applications is reduced to a manageable level.
One thing that has changed dramatically in the last 20 years or so, is the way that a big tranche of private schools have become hard core education mills. There are enough rich parents of smart children to fill them many times over - especially when you consider the overseas cohorts.
Which is why private schools over achieve in places at various universities. If you want 4 As at A*, private is where they are turning them out.
Is Durham academically demanding? At least half the people in my year at school ended up there, and they were very much the "cream" stereotype of public schoolboys, i.e. rich and thick. This was of course a long time ago and things may have changed since then. But it was generally where the rugger buggers went.
There are danger signs. Before Boris imploded the Conservative Party in 2021, Starmer wasn't doing too well against him. And much of Labour's polling success is IMV down to the Conservative's implosion, rather than Starmer's brilliance.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
I'm not seeing the danger signs.
Which is not to say Starmer is guaranteed for at least two terms. Simply that the signs aren't there for his collapse in turn, as far as I can see. In a competitive environment, the Conservatives will need to do whatever the opposite of implode is. No-one seems to know what that is.
Secondly Starmer is methodically denying Conservatives the grounds from which to attack him. Tax cuts - Which public services do you want to make even worse? Border control - we putting those in place, do you want to talk about Rwanda? Economy? - relative stability and so on.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
I wonder why.
The problem with UK society is that it hugely advantages those who are rather posh but slightly dim while severely disadvantages those who are oiks but super bright.
Not in formal terms - ie riches, rewards, etc - but in the horrible, debilitating, and ineluctable sense of inferiority and insecurity we see so often in that latter group.
The trick is not to assume social background dictates character or personality. For example, sometimes poshboys (of a sensitive bent) are so aware of what they owe to privilege that they become extremely nice quiet thoughtful people without a hint of bombast or overweening self-regard.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
One of my litmus tests of people is how many minutes into a conversation are they capable of getting through without asking "what school did you go to?" before eagerly speaking of their own alma mater.
Understandable when you're 19 and in your first year as an undergrad (particularly if everyone at your uni went to posh school), what I find unfathomable is I know people in their 40s and beyond who are still the same way.
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
Paula Vennells vs Jason Beer, is going to be up there with Tyson Fury vs Olexander Usyk.
I think it's more likely to be one of those no hopers v Mike Tyson fights I remember from my youth...
Marvis Frazier - son of Joe Frazier - was probably the worst one of those.
Even the commentators were saying about how much of a mismatch it was, and I made it 24” between the opening bell and Frazier hitting the deck unconscious.
IIRC that was the one that was in the wee hours over here - one local pub had got a special license, charged for tickets and then had to deal with the upset customers who'd paid a fair bit to see 30 seconds...
That’s always a risk on fight night.
I was in my local pub yesterday and asked them if they’ll be showing the fight tomorrow. The landlord’s replay was that if it starts before they close - 3am local time, midnight UK time - they’ll show it, but that the last Saudi fight ran late. So my plan is to hope it’s on at the pub, and be prepared to run 100 yards home and pay $20 for the local PPV otherwise.
Interesting to see that Betfair punters are evenly split on the winner, but think Fury wins by stoppage and Usyk by decision.
It's actually fascinating. You saw my post the other day I know. Here it is again for those who weren't paying attention:
Usyk: heavy cruiserweight rather than proper heavyweight hence light on his feet (!) but no knockout power. Will likely dance around Fury for the first few rounds to see if Fury can hurt him (he probably can but himself is not a puncher) and try to land some body shots and then in the later rounds, if fitness comes into it, he will try to land the kind of shots he is known for (AJ, Dubois) racking up the points.
Fury: will be trying to throw Usyk round like a rag doll, leaning, smothering him, manhandling him and trying to drain Usyk's energy just keeping him off. Then will look for a decent shot or three to impress the judges, perhaps he looks to put Usyk down. Nothing out of the camps which is unusual which might mean he is training seriously. Ngannou's Fury gets beat "easily".
So with bf calling it just about even but favouring Fury (2.08 vs 2.14, which I put down to the home crowd) it's anyone's fight and should be fascinating and worth the £25 even though the undercard isn't mesmerising - I like the Opetaia Breidis fight.
So my call? Usyk. Not just because I like him (everyone likes him) and am meh towards TF but because Fury has always been called "the boxer" and Usyk can outbox him. If he has enough energy left having been leant on for eight straight rounds.
Who do you have for Sanchez - Kabayel.
Ring Magazine rates Sanchez #6 and Kabayel #10, Boxrec Sanchez #9 and Kabayel #5 and Sanchez #9.The betting favours Sanchez but it wouldn't be the world's biggest betting shock if Kabayel won.
They're both 31, Sanchez looking particularly bright and babyfaced
Fifa will hold an urgent meeting to decide if Israel should be thrown out of world football over its response to the October 7 Hamas terrorist attacks, Gianni Infantino has announced.
Infantino confirmed the governing body would carry out a “legal assessment” of a proposal submitted by the Palestine Football Association (PFA) for inclusion on the agenda for its annual congress in Bangkok this week.
The proposal, which was backed by the FAs of Algeria, Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Yemen, was not put to a vote of Fifa member associations on Friday, with Infantino revealing it would decided upon at an emergency meeting of the organisation’s council in late July.
A Moroccan asylum seeker who murdered a pensioner in the street in “revenge” for the Israel-Hamas conflict has been jailed for life with a minimum term of 45 years.
Starmers six pledges are horribly bland and minor. Probably the right call though for election purposes, just have to have fingers crossed they understand the job much better than this:
Sticking to tough spending rules in order to deliver economic stability
Cutting NHS waiting lists by providing 40,000 more appointments each week - funded by tackling tax avoidance and non-dom loopholes
Launching a border security command to stop the gangs arranging small boat crossings
Setting up Great British Energy, a publicly owned clean power energy company
Providing more neighbourhood police officers to reduce antisocial behaviour and introduced new penalties for offenders
Recruiting 6,500 teachers, paid for through ending tax breaks for private schools.
Think this might be the end of the road for politicians pledges. If they raise more questions than they answer, and no-one thinks they account to much, even if they believed them, maybe it's time to bin them.
But aren't the questions entirely centred around their lack of ambition, rather than their believability?
Branding them as "Labour's First Steps..." is a pretty clear acknowledgement of that, so you have to imagine that this is a deliberate safety-first strategy from SKS.
As pledges go, these ones are at least rather more tangible than those chiselled onto the EdStone!
I didn't get a chance to reply to your response. The questions for these pledges I think are mainly in what they don't cover. They don't address at all the most important policy changes that the Labour Party wants to implement, eg climate change, housebuilding, workers rights. Even the second level policies in the pledges have only minimal targets attached. They should be expected to do better than that.
Starmer was reduced to saying, in effect, don't judge us on these pledges. I'm which case why have them? Either say, these are the areas we will focus on, judge us at the next election how well we did. Or do proper SMART goals which are achievable (as well as relevant) but won't always be achieved.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
Very good. I mean not quite, or indeed at all there but very good and entertaining. By the same token I could say that you take quite anodyne comments of mine and append to them quite the most enormous amount of baggage. Which is why when you go off on these lines my main response is incomprehension.
I suspect it's all more a reflection on you than it is on me but again, I would say that wouldn't I.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
One of my litmus tests of people is how many minutes into a conversation are they capable of getting through without asking "what school did you go to?" before eagerly speaking of their own alma mater.
Understandable when you're 19 and in your first year as an undergrad (particularly if everyone at your uni went to posh school), what I find unfathomable is I know people in their 40s and beyond who are still the same way.
There isn't a single university which does not have a majority of state educated students. Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, Exeter, St Andrew's are all the same. Most people didn't attend private schools.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
One of my litmus tests of people is how many minutes into a conversation are they capable of getting through without asking "what school did you go to?" before eagerly speaking of their own alma mater.
Understandable when you're 19 and in your first year as an undergrad (particularly if everyone at your uni went to posh school), what I find unfathomable is I know people in their 40s and beyond who are still the same way.
I quite like the 'what school did you go to?' question because it's a first step to 'do you know x'? Which is always quite satisfying. This is just as true in my world of knowing people who went to stolid but unremarkable schools in suburban Greater Manchester as it presumably is for people who know people from expensive public schools. So I don't judge people poorly for doing so.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
One of my litmus tests of people is how many minutes into a conversation are they capable of getting through without asking "what school did you go to?" before eagerly speaking of their own alma mater.
Understandable when you're 19 and in your first year as an undergrad (particularly if everyone at your uni went to posh school), what I find unfathomable is I know people in their 40s and beyond who are still the same way.
Same with Oxbridge
I have several acquaintances who have - sadly - achieved fuck all in their lives (relatively speaking) but they will still quite often mention that they went to Trinity or Balliol or whatever. One senses that was when they peaked; it is a little melancholy to witness. These are people in their 40s and 50s
Perhaps they will mention it to God when they die. I can picture @TOPPING at the Gates of Heaven casually remarking to St Peter “you know I have nephews at Eton? But let’s not worry about all that”
From nieces and nephews and sons/daughters of friends I can say with some authority that, ex-Oxbridge, the pecking order for universities is as follows:
-1 (out of reach coz of the roylz): St. Andrews 0 - Durham 1 - Exeter, "Royal Agricultural University" (previously RAC) 2 - Newcastle, Leeds, Edinburgh, Bristol, UEA (for arts esp History of Art), Reading (for ag) 3 - the rest
And no I don't mean academically.
I’m guessing that your survey base was a bit dim as they left out a few of the top ranked unis in the world such as Imperial, UCL and LSE which attract a lot of moneyed and connected people who are too bright to waste their time at Durham and Exeter etc and also get to spend their university years partying in London rather than some shitty provincial clubs.
Insecure much?
Don't get all snitty I said it wasn't academically. "blah blah blah ranked unis in the world blah blah".
Not remotely insecure, I’ve really got nothing to be insecure about, and I was making the point that not only are they highly ranked academically but the social element there is also very high - I would guess higher than those in your rankings but they blend in because London is quite big funnily enough.
NOT REMOTELY INSECURE.
Okey dokey.
Leaving out Imperial, UCL and LSE does seem like a gap, though.
My eldest daughter decided on UCL - a mixture of academic reputation and fashionability.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
I wonder why.
The problem with UK society is that it hugely advantages those who are rather posh but slightly dim while severely disadvantages those who are oiks but super bright.
Not in formal terms - ie riches, rewards, etc - but in the horrible, debilitating, and ineluctable sense of inferiority and insecurity we see so often in that latter group.
The trick is not to assume social background dictates character or personality. For example, sometimes poshboys (of a sensitive bent) are so aware of what they owe to privilege that they become extremely nice quiet thoughtful people without a hint of bombast or overweening self-regard.
I don't think social background dictates character or personality. That gives no agency to anyone. I do think that we have a highly stratified class system in this country (when an Englishman opens his mouth...etc) and that as we heard earlier on this thread and also as the Two Ronnies and John Cleese so acutely pointed out, it fucks people up and the people who mainly get it in the neck are the aspiring bourgeoisie who aren't one thing or the other and hence in their own minds (important distinction) always get it wrong because they are trying too hard and are too fearful of being judged or "getting it wrong".
As a working class Yorkshireman I have to say I loved all the oik chat on the last thread.
My experience of Oxford was that public school toffs went round like they owned the place, comprehensively educated Northerners could set themselves up as working class heroes, and both found common ground in despising southern grammar school, or grammar school adjacent, types like me. It also explains the hate for SKS on here
My son's friends seem mildly surprised that he actually has a house with running water and power. Their understanding of Scotland is remarkably incomplete. But he is loving his time there. So much so that right now a life in academia looks highly attractive to him.
I struggled through university basically because I was at the wrong one. I did the Oxford entrance as my best friend was doing it and was as surprised as anyone when I got in. I was an dysthymic antelope in a university full of self-confident hyenas (including Liz Truss and Sian Berry at the time). However, two and a half decades later, I went back to Birkbeck and it went so swimmingly that I’m thinking of doing a doctorate.
From my incredibly reliable poll sample of 1 I would say that the Oxford system really suits people who are very focused on and genuinely love their subject. Last year my son had 1 to 1 tutorials in one of his topics.
Compared to my somewhat ancient experience and indeed that of his siblings which is more recent he works incredibly hard, probably about 70 hours a week. It certainly wouldn't suit or benefit those who want a degree to tick a box. To be honest I am slightly jealous of his opportunities compared with the relatively boring and certainly uninspiring education I got. But he worked hard to get it and has thrown himself into it with enthusiasm.
Hard working and incredibly focussed does not sound like Boris, and surely the whole point of Oxbridge is not to study but to throw yourself into politics or rowing or theatre or comedy; to dress up for dinner; to make connections who will give you your first job, and when you foul up there, your second. Hard work and focus is well down the list.
He was chair of the debating committee for a year so it is not all work and no play but I understand that he almost never goes to the formals etc.
Boris was neither hard working nor focused. I have spoken to enough of his contemporaries at School to be pretty clear that he was lazy, entitled, and brilliant back then and his character doesn't seem to have changed since.
Boris was what my son dismissively calls a hack, that is someone whose main interest is not their subject but Oxford Union politics. It is, from his description, a somewhat poisonous cesspit where our future politicians learn to dissemble, bribe, be bribed and manipulate. It is not a surprise that so many of our PMs come from such a rich training ground. If you can survive and thrive there the Commons must be a dawdle.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
One of my litmus tests of people is how many minutes into a conversation are they capable of getting through without asking "what school did you go to?" before eagerly speaking of their own alma mater.
Understandable when you're 19 and in your first year as an undergrad (particularly if everyone at your uni went to posh school), what I find unfathomable is I know people in their 40s and beyond who are still the same way.
Do people really ask that? That's on the same level as what A levels you did. I can safely say that no one has asked me what school I went to in polite company since, as you say, I was in my early years at university. Weird.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
Very good. I mean not quite, or indeed at all there but very good and entertaining. By the same token I could say that you take quite anodyne comments of mine and append to them quite the most enormous amount of baggage. Which is why when you go off on these lines my main response is incomprehension.
I suspect it's all more a reflection on you than it is on me but again, I would say that wouldn't I.
Thanks. I’m really good at this - skewering people with their precise status within the English class system - because I realised about 5-10 years ago that I’ve had such an extraordinary life I’ve entirely exited the English class system and indeed risen above it
I look down on everyone. It’s not pleasant but there it is. What it does give me is an ability to observe, objectively
If anyone needs diagnosing Class Doctor @Leon is here all week
Having comprehensively dissed Paula Vennels and her work as head of the PO, Alisdair Campbell (her former CFO) was shown his hand-written note to her on learning of her resignation. It was a glowing tribute.
How embarrassing!
Jason Beer then says he will go in with a lighter touch on the next bit because of Cameron's "What Went Wrong" document.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
Yes, I very much have the impression that Campbell figured what way the wind was blowing and switched sides as far as he was able.
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
Paula Vennells vs Jason Beer, is going to be up there with Tyson Fury vs Olexander Usyk.
I think it's more likely to be one of those no hopers v Mike Tyson fights I remember from my youth...
Marvis Frazier - son of Joe Frazier - was probably the worst one of those.
Even the commentators were saying about how much of a mismatch it was, and I made it 24” between the opening bell and Frazier hitting the deck unconscious.
IIRC that was the one that was in the wee hours over here - one local pub had got a special license, charged for tickets and then had to deal with the upset customers who'd paid a fair bit to see 30 seconds...
That’s always a risk on fight night.
I was in my local pub yesterday and asked them if they’ll be showing the fight tomorrow. The landlord’s replay was that if it starts before they close - 3am local time, midnight UK time - they’ll show it, but that the last Saudi fight ran late. So my plan is to hope it’s on at the pub, and be prepared to run 100 yards home and pay $20 for the local PPV otherwise.
Interesting to see that Betfair punters are evenly split on the winner, but think Fury wins by stoppage and Usyk by decision.
It's actually fascinating. You saw my post the other day I know. Here it is again for those who weren't paying attention:
Usyk: heavy cruiserweight rather than proper heavyweight hence light on his feet (!) but no knockout power. Will likely dance around Fury for the first few rounds to see if Fury can hurt him (he probably can but himself is not a puncher) and try to land some body shots and then in the later rounds, if fitness comes into it, he will try to land the kind of shots he is known for (AJ, Dubois) racking up the points.
Fury: will be trying to throw Usyk round like a rag doll, leaning, smothering him, manhandling him and trying to drain Usyk's energy just keeping him off. Then will look for a decent shot or three to impress the judges, perhaps he looks to put Usyk down. Nothing out of the camps which is unusual which might mean he is training seriously. Ngannou's Fury gets beat "easily".
So with bf calling it just about even but favouring Fury (2.08 vs 2.14, which I put down to the home crowd) it's anyone's fight and should be fascinating and worth the £25 even though the undercard isn't mesmerising - I like the Opetaia Breidis fight.
So my call? Usyk. Not just because I like him (everyone likes him) and am meh towards TF but because Fury has always been called "the boxer" and Usyk can outbox him. If he has enough energy left having been leant on for eight straight rounds.
Who do you have for Sanchez - Kabayel.
Ring Magazine rates Sanchez #6 and Kabayel #10, Boxrec Sanchez #9 and Kabayel #5 and Sanchez #9.The betting favours Sanchez but it wouldn't be the world's biggest betting shock if Kabayel won.
They're both 31, Sanchez looking particularly bright and babyfaced
I like Sanchez. But I can't get excited about the fight tbh and not just because he reminds me of Ortiz! There is just too much going on above them in the rankings and I don't see them setting the class alight. Slightly surprised Zhang Wilder wasn't on the card.
My so-called “palazzo hotel” is not in fact open until 4pm so I am FORCED to drink quite a few aperols on the Aragonese bastions. Things could get messy
As a working class Yorkshireman I have to say I loved all the oik chat on the last thread.
My experience of Oxford was that public school toffs went round like they owned the place, comprehensively educated Northerners could set themselves up as working class heroes, and both found common ground in despising southern grammar school, or grammar school adjacent, types like me. It also explains the hate for SKS on here
My son's friends seem mildly surprised that he actually has a house with running water and power. Their understanding of Scotland is remarkably incomplete. But he is loving his time there. So much so that right now a life in academia looks highly attractive to him.
I struggled through university basically because I was at the wrong one. I did the Oxford entrance as my best friend was doing it and was as surprised as anyone when I got in. I was an dysthymic antelope in a university full of self-confident hyenas (including Liz Truss and Sian Berry at the time). However, two and a half decades later, I went back to Birkbeck and it went so swimmingly that I’m thinking of doing a doctorate.
From my incredibly reliable poll sample of 1 I would say that the Oxford system really suits people who are very focused on and genuinely love their subject. Last year my son had 1 to 1 tutorials in one of his topics.
Compared to my somewhat ancient experience and indeed that of his siblings which is more recent he works incredibly hard, probably about 70 hours a week. It certainly wouldn't suit or benefit those who want a degree to tick a box. To be honest I am slightly jealous of his opportunities compared with the relatively boring and certainly uninspiring education I got. But he worked hard to get it and has thrown himself into it with enthusiasm.
Hard working and incredibly focussed does not sound like Boris, and surely the whole point of Oxbridge is not to study but to throw yourself into politics or rowing or theatre or comedy; to dress up for dinner; to make connections who will give you your first job, and when you foul up there, your second. Hard work and focus is well down the list.
He was chair of the debating committee for a year so it is not all work and no play but I understand that he almost never goes to the formals etc.
Boris was neither hard working nor focused. I have spoken to enough of his contemporaries at School to be pretty clear that he was lazy, entitled, and brilliant back then and his character doesn't seem to have changed since.
Boris was what my son dismissively calls a hack, that is someone whose main interest is not their subject but Oxford Union politics. It is, from his description, a somewhat poisonous cesspit where our future politicians learn to dissemble, bribe, be bribed and manipulate. It is not a surprise that so many of our PMs come from such a rich training ground. If you can survive and thrive there the Commons must be a dawdle.
Which takes us back to the problem with the public school - Oxbridge - top job pipeline.
It selects for something, and develops that something very well. Then wider society rewards that something, which shows how good the pipeline is. And so it continues.
The nagging doubt is that what the pipleline develops and delivers is confidence over competence. People who can do the politics far better than they can do the government. With the consequences we see around us.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
One of my litmus tests of people is how many minutes into a conversation are they capable of getting through without asking "what school did you go to?" before eagerly speaking of their own alma mater.
Understandable when you're 19 and in your first year as an undergrad (particularly if everyone at your uni went to posh school), what I find unfathomable is I know people in their 40s and beyond who are still the same way.
Do people really ask that? That's on the same level as what A levels you did. I can safely say that no one has asked me what school I went to in polite company since, as you say, I was in my early years at university. Weird.
Agreed (hangover waning) - the only person in real life who has asked me where I went to school since i was at university was an American lady in her 60’s (who became a great friend) who was asking because she was desperate to tell me that her daughter was marrying an OE. Even though she was super wealthy old money it mattered a lot to her.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
One of my litmus tests of people is how many minutes into a conversation are they capable of getting through without asking "what school did you go to?" before eagerly speaking of their own alma mater.
Understandable when you're 19 and in your first year as an undergrad (particularly if everyone at your uni went to posh school), what I find unfathomable is I know people in their 40s and beyond who are still the same way.
Do people really ask that? That's on the same level as what A levels you did. I can safely say that no one has asked me what school I went to in polite company since, as you say, I was in my early years at university. Weird.
It still happens, and I'm in my 40s. Generally it's done quite subtly, out with a wider group of friends a month or so ago someone I had met five minutes previously mentioned 'I was at the same school as [famous person, who is instantly identifiable as having gone to one of the more famous places]'. It was a clear invite to continue the conversation with 'Oh, you were at [that school]? I was at [insert name of other place full of rich thickoes]. Do you know [Chap with ridiculous name, Boko Fittleworth type], think he was in the year above you?' Which is how these conversations often go.
Might be a reflection of the type of people I hang out with, which is probably sadly a reflection on me as well. The thing about the old school tie is it's more of an old school tattoo, you can travel all your life and never really get away from it.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
Very good. I mean not quite, or indeed at all there but very good and entertaining. By the same token I could say that you take quite anodyne comments of mine and append to them quite the most enormous amount of baggage. Which is why when you go off on these lines my main response is incomprehension.
I suspect it's all more a reflection on you than it is on me but again, I would say that wouldn't I.
Thanks. I’m really good at this - skewering people with their precise status within the English class system - because I realised about 5-10 years ago that I’ve had such an extraordinary life I’ve entirely exited the English class system and indeed risen above it
I look down on everyone. It’s not pleasant but there it is. What it does give me is an ability to observe, objectively
If anyone needs diagnosing Class Doctor @Leon is here all week
I think what you are very good at is identifying areas where you are not as confident as you might be and pronouncing yourself an expert and therefore trying to close down the conversation.
Class has to be the most boring and yet intriguing thing on the planet and will differ to everyone. A bit like pornography perhaps in that regard.
Now, I started the whole thing by naming the class-based ranking of ex-Oxbridge universities. So I have myself to blame and we have had some back and forth on this.
What I find interesting is that certain posters - and you are among this group - take it all so super seriously and try to interpret and examine and unpick and whatnot. Which in itself is a dreadfully bourgeois thing to do (kidding).
I wouldn't worry about it. You say you are outwith the English class system so why worry. I would say that you very well may be. And good for you. Except also sadly for you there is a cohort, perhaps sitting as we speak enjoying lunch at White's, who perhaps who have no time for books or all that nonsense, and perhaps many of whom "run the country", which thinks you are a dreadful oik. And that's probably what is upsetting you.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
Very good. I mean not quite, or indeed at all there but very good and entertaining. By the same token I could say that you take quite anodyne comments of mine and append to them quite the most enormous amount of baggage. Which is why when you go off on these lines my main response is incomprehension.
I suspect it's all more a reflection on you than it is on me but again, I would say that wouldn't I.
Thanks. I’m really good at this - skewering people with their precise status within the English class system - because I realised about 5-10 years ago that I’ve had such an extraordinary life I’ve entirely exited the English class system and indeed risen above it
I look down on everyone. It’s not pleasant but there it is. What it does give me is an ability to observe, objectively
If anyone needs diagnosing Class Doctor @Leon is here all week
I think what you are very good at is identifying areas where you are not as confident as you might be and pronouncing yourself an expert and therefore trying to close down the conversation.
Class has to be the most boring and yet intriguing thing on the planet and will differ to everyone. A bit like pornography perhaps in that regard.
Now, I started the whole thing by naming the class-based ranking of ex-Oxbridge universities. So I have myself to blame and we have had some back and forth on this.
What I find interesting is that certain posters - and you are among this group - take it all so super seriously and try to interpret and examine and unpick and whatnot. Which in itself is a dreadfully bourgeois thing to do (kidding).
I wouldn't worry about it. You say you are outwith the English class system so why worry. I would say that you very well may be. And good for you. Except also sadly for you there is a cohort, perhaps sitting as we speak enjoying lunch at White's, who perhaps who have no time for books or all that nonsense, and perhaps many of whom "run the country", which thinks you are a dreadful oik. And that's probably what is upsetting you.
@TOPPING’s list is for the rather posh but slightly dim
Whereas @boulay's hangover accounted for what seemed like a chippy post to me, you seem genuinely to be chippy. Which is fine, each to their own, etc don't let it upset you.
lol! Bazzzzinggggg!
er whatevs.
You are SO sensitive on anything to do with class. I suspect it’s because it’s all you have. Your solitary claim to fame is that you’re quite high born. @StillWaters reacts similarly to this debate - but we know he is middle class so maybe it’s merely aspirational for him
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
One of my litmus tests of people is how many minutes into a conversation are they capable of getting through without asking "what school did you go to?" before eagerly speaking of their own alma mater.
Understandable when you're 19 and in your first year as an undergrad (particularly if everyone at your uni went to posh school), what I find unfathomable is I know people in their 40s and beyond who are still the same way.
Do people really ask that? That's on the same level as what A levels you did. I can safely say that no one has asked me what school I went to in polite company since, as you say, I was in my early years at university. Weird.
It still happens, and I'm in my 40s. Generally it's done quite subtly, out with a wider group of friends a month or so ago someone I had met five minutes previously mentioned 'I was at the same school as [famous person, who is instantly identifiable as having gone to one of the more famous places]'. It was a clear invite to continue the conversation with 'Oh, you were at [that school]? I was at [insert name of other place full of rich thickoes]. Do you know [Chap with ridiculous name, Boko Fittleworth type], think he was in the year above you?' Which is how these conversations often go.
Might be a reflection of the type of people I hang out with, which is probably sadly a reflection on me as well. The thing about the old school tie is it's more of an old school tattoo, you can travel all your life and never really get away from it.
Interesting. I think the "I was at school with XXX" might just have been a good old fashioned name drop but you are nearer the situation. But perhaps you are right. What a numpty.
A Moroccan asylum seeker who murdered a pensioner in the street in “revenge” for the Israel-Hamas conflict has been jailed for life with a minimum term of 45 years.
Horrible evil crime no doubt showing dangerous dispositions etc but FFS. No wonder the prisons are bursting at the seams.
Comments
And (reluctant hat tip to Leon, who noticed this first) things like electric tuktuks are filling the taxi gap - they were bizarrely popular in New Zealand, buzzing around little mountain towns.
Whereas deconstipating the planning system and getting more Britain built... It's important and the Conservatives aren't going to do it (not with their electorate), but it's not quick.
But if you think the manifesto, or any election campiagn pledge, is a proper promise, I have a bridge to sell you. All we can really do is try to judge character and instincts in advance, and evaluate performance in retrospect.
And that's why the Conservatives are in so much trouble.
Also mortgage rates have been reducing this week.
Days of unrest in the French Pacific territory – sparked by a plan to change voting rules – have left five dead"
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/17/new-caledonia-riots-protests-noumea-out-of-state-control
Eyewitnesses said Foster had not pointed his weapon. (Foster’s weapon had the safety on and no cartridge in the chamber, so it wouldn’t even have made sense for Foster to point his weapon.)
Perry had run a red light to drive his car into the protest. He had previously repeatedly talked of going to shoot protesters, of wanting to shoot Muslims… oh, and had also been sexting a 16 year old.
Effectively saying I would have run you through you horrible toad but because, belatedly, you tried to make amends having accepted what happened, I'm going to take it easier. Count yourself very, very lucky.
[Sits back, clicking periodically to check for likes and replies.]
It will be fascinating to see if Vennels tries to do the same when she appears next week.
She's sure going to be box office.
(Are PO Box addresses still a thing?)
Oh, Texas- right.
As did Bush Senior really. He lost the next election primarily due to an economic recession thing and seeing part of his vote split to Ross Perot, while still getting quite high approval rates.
All he needs to become PM is the Conservative Party to continue being utter *****s - which I think he will get. But after he's PM, he will need much more.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3TY5r7ulTQY
Even the commentators were saying about how much of a mismatch it was, and I made it 24” between the opening bell and Frazier hitting the deck unconscious.
He has supported a left Labour party and ensured that it never won an election while he would not have become the Prime Minister.
He was leftish/Remainery while necessary - up to and including being elected leader, by a mile on first round, following the personally satisfactory 2019 defeat.
He has lost the support of the ultra left - the ones he needs to lose in order to attract 2 million Tory votes - and gained millions of new voters by placing himself in the social democrat centre left and abandoning his old friends.
He has made his, previously unelectable, party look like the natural party of government.
It is obvious that he wants to win 2 elections at least, and it is obvious that he will do whatever is required to do so. As this involves moderation, a limited degree of honesty, small and deliverable promises, and competence that is what he will try to do.
He, and it, could all be a great deal worse. he has earned the public's patience.
Cameron seems a huge dick. Likely a grammar school boy.
Starmer spent most of 2020 grinding the Conservative lead down to near-parity by December 2020. Bozza got a hefty bounce from the vaccine and the stone that Starmer had been patiently rolling up the hill rolled back and squashed him again.
One of the things that has persuaded me that SKS has the right stuff is that he kept buggering on, and rolled the stone up the hill again. From about June 2021, voters swung blue-to-red at a fairly steady rate; the scandals and Trusstershambles were just the unpleasant icing on the cake.
Wonder what drove that turning point three years ago?
Aside from that, who is more likely to be more motivated to vote on this as an issue - someone making an extra £275 a year from savings, or someone staring at a £3k a year or (or more - I was conservative in choosing 2.5% as a starting point, many were on sub 2% deals) extra cash they have to find, just to keep the roof over their head?
I thought our borders were a nightmare
On the latter Starmer has worked wonders, especially as he was ostensibly a Corbynite. And I suspect in political terms (a) is pretty incompatible with having a strong left of centre vision for the future, so that will have to wait.
So many references are a statement from HR that "Y worked at this company between these date, with job title Z".
Starmer slipped up during COVID because there was a level of appreciation from the public that this was a difficult time, and he was often too quick to criticise and oppose for the sake of it. He came across at rather uncharitable.
He has got smarter at that game. He’s still very ready to criticise the government (which is an easy win nowadays) but he is also better at triangulating and moderating his criticisms.
Not in formal terms - ie riches, rewards, etc - but in the horrible, debilitating, and ineluctable sense of inferiority and insecurity we see so often in that latter group.
Perhaps the "deliver economic stability" is a bit weak, as it's just a pledge to not deliberately crash the economy or go on a massive unfunded spending spree - but the other five are all concrete targets, and you can see how they might quickly go about meeting them.
And, importantly, they invite comparison with the top priorities of the current govt in the 6-8 months they have left - which appear to be: 1) Ban foreign students, 2) Ban tents, 3) Ban rainbows
It is entirely understandable that people who don't have to provide them don't. Gossip in the pub, guesswork, unattributable remarks, and phone calls that did not take place are significant bits of currency.
Employment lawyers have starving wives and children to feed and clothe. Eton doesn't pay for itself.
One thing that has changed dramatically in the last 20 years or so, is the way that a big tranche of private schools have become hard core education mills. There are enough rich parents of smart children to fill them many times over - especially when you consider the overseas cohorts.
Which is why private schools over achieve in places at various universities. If you want 4 As at A*, private is where they are turning them out.
But there's a trap in thinking that things that happened 1994-97 were inevitable. The economy was recovering well, Major had faced down Redwood and the rebels, the cabinet had some heavy hitters to a far greater extent than now, and there was still a threat from Blair's left. That those never came close to translating into a real Tory recovery or Labour schism is a testament to Blair's political skill - he never allowed the Tories to get any traction.
Would Blair have struggled against Johnson in 2020/21? Certainly more than he did against Major. But probably a good deal less than Starmer did against Johnson. That's not necessarily a criticism of Starmer - he has many qualities and may well be a better PM than Blair was. But Blair was a very effective politician - he was a showman, had a very good idea of how people's minds work, transformed the central office machine, and on the basic level had good judgment on what would fly politically and what wouldn't. It doesn't mean his policies were right - that's a different question.
I was in my local pub yesterday and asked them if they’ll be showing the fight tomorrow. The landlord’s replay was that if it starts before they close - 3am local time, midnight UK time - they’ll show it, but that the last Saudi fight ran late. So my plan is to hope it’s on at the pub, and be prepared to run 100 yards home and pay $20 for the local PPV otherwise.
Interesting to see that Betfair punters are evenly split on the winner, but think Fury wins by stoppage and Usyk by decision.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/boxing/event/32993837/multi-market?marketIds=1.224405982&marketIds=1.224405983&marketIds=1.224405983&tab=Popular
Gallipoli - not that one - on the Ionian coast of puglia. An entire walled town on an island connected by a fortified bridge with Aragonese walls everywhere
Probably it is rammed in high summer but in May in blazing sun there is one small street of tourist tat and the rest is tiny alleyways with the smell of new washing and fried fish and men in string vests either bursting into opera or arguing obscurely but furiously with the neighbours (two feet away) in explosive pugliese
Usyk: heavy cruiserweight rather than proper heavyweight hence light on his feet (!) but no knockout power. Will likely dance around Fury for the first few rounds to see if Fury can hurt him (he probably can but himself is not a puncher) and try to land some body shots and then in the later rounds, if fitness comes into it, he will try to land the kind of shots he is known for (AJ, Dubois) racking up the points.
Fury: will be trying to throw Usyk round like a rag doll, leaning, smothering him, manhandling him and trying to drain Usyk's energy just keeping him off. Then will look for a decent shot or three to impress the judges, perhaps he looks to put Usyk down. Nothing out of the camps which is unusual which might mean he is training seriously. Ngannou's Fury gets beat "easily".
So with bf calling it just about even but favouring Fury (2.08 vs 2.14, which I put down to the home crowd) it's anyone's fight and should be fascinating and worth the £25 even though the undercard isn't mesmerising - I like the Opetaia Breidis fight.
So my call? Usyk. Not just because I like him (everyone likes him) and am meh towards TF but because Fury has always been called "the boxer" and Usyk can outbox him. If he has enough energy left having been leant on for eight straight rounds.
Which is not to say Starmer is guaranteed for at least two terms. Simply that the signs aren't there for his collapse in turn, as far as I can see. In a competitive environment, the Conservatives will need to do whatever the opposite of implode is. No-one seems to know what that is.
Secondly Starmer is methodically denying Conservatives the grounds from which to attack him. Tax cuts - Which public services do you want to make even worse? Border control - we putting those in place, do you want to talk about Rwanda? Economy? - relative stability and so on.
Yet you like to quietly boast about your social stature - nephews at Eton! - even as you know it is intrinsically absurd and indeed naff. Indeed gauche
So it therefore projects an air of social insecurity all of your own. Which is delightfully ironic
Understandable when you're 19 and in your first year as an undergrad (particularly if everyone at your uni went to posh school), what I find unfathomable is I know people in their 40s and beyond who are still the same way.
Ring Magazine rates Sanchez #6 and Kabayel #10, Boxrec Sanchez #9 and Kabayel #5 and Sanchez #9.The betting favours Sanchez but it wouldn't be the world's biggest betting shock if Kabayel won.
They're both 31, Sanchez looking particularly bright and babyfaced
Infantino confirmed the governing body would carry out a “legal assessment” of a proposal submitted by the Palestine Football Association (PFA) for inclusion on the agenda for its annual congress in Bangkok this week.
The proposal, which was backed by the FAs of Algeria, Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Yemen, was not put to a vote of Fifa member associations on Friday, with Infantino revealing it would decided upon at an emergency meeting of the organisation’s council in late July.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2024/05/17/fifa-urgent-meeting-decide-israel-banned-palestine-hamas/
A Moroccan asylum seeker who murdered a pensioner in the street in “revenge” for the Israel-Hamas conflict has been jailed for life with a minimum term of 45 years.
Starmer was reduced to saying, in effect, don't judge us on these pledges. I'm which case why have them? Either say, these are the areas we will focus on, judge us at the next election how well we did. Or do proper SMART goals which are achievable (as well as relevant) but won't always be achieved.
I suspect it's all more a reflection on you than it is on me but again, I would say that wouldn't I.
I have several acquaintances who have - sadly - achieved fuck all in their lives (relatively speaking) but they will still quite often mention that they went to Trinity or Balliol or whatever. One senses that was when they peaked; it is a little melancholy to witness. These are people in their 40s and 50s
Perhaps they will mention it to God when they die. I can picture @TOPPING at the Gates of Heaven casually remarking to St Peter “you know I have nephews at Eton? But let’s not worry about all that”
I look down on everyone. It’s not pleasant but there it is. What it does give me is an ability to observe, objectively
If anyone needs diagnosing Class Doctor @Leon is here all week
It selects for something, and develops that something very well. Then wider society rewards that something, which shows how good the pipeline is. And so it continues.
The nagging doubt is that what the pipleline develops and delivers is confidence over competence. People who can do the politics far better than they can do the government. With the consequences we see around us.
Might be a reflection of the type of people I hang out with, which is probably sadly a reflection on me as well. The thing about the old school tie is it's more of an old school tattoo, you can travel all your life and never really get away from it.
Class has to be the most boring and yet intriguing thing on the planet and will differ to everyone. A bit like pornography perhaps in that regard.
Now, I started the whole thing by naming the class-based ranking of ex-Oxbridge universities. So I have myself to blame and we have had some back and forth on this.
What I find interesting is that certain posters - and you are among this group - take it all so super seriously and try to interpret and examine and unpick and whatnot. Which in itself is a dreadfully bourgeois thing to do (kidding).
I wouldn't worry about it. You say you are outwith the English class system so why worry. I would say that you very well may be. And good for you. Except also sadly for you there is a cohort, perhaps sitting as we speak enjoying lunch at White's, who perhaps who have no time for books or all that nonsense, and perhaps many of whom "run the country", which thinks you are a dreadful oik. And that's probably what is upsetting you.
*thinks*
Nah