Hmmm. Just been forwarded a letter from the police about safety and security during the campaign. Terrorism threat level is SUBSTANTIAL apparently.
Not sure I need to worry about Terrorism. Just angry Nats, of which there are quite a few commenting on my FB adverts with "get out of my town" and "fuck off back to England" etc
One odd comment on our village FB group. The village hall has been bedecked by Saltaires. Some wag tried to complain that the hall should not be used for political propaganda. Erm, its the Fitba, and thats the flag. Not remotely political...
Following your posts, I had a little flutter on you winning your seat at 66/1. So, could you please:
1. Stop posting on here and get out campaigning. I don't imagine there are many PBers in your constituency. 2. Pretend you're Scottish for a few weeks.
If I'm tapping away on here its as a distraction from the endless client project meetings I am in. Campaigning being done digitally, and physically outside work time. Still have two more trips south before polling day.
From what I can see of the campaigns: SNP: Candidate and teams out practically full time LD: Limited doorknocking in selected pockets to dip for mood. Which feeds into digital campaigning specifically targeted on issues. Big spend increase this week with another next week. Last week campaign in plan Con: Has put up pictures of a doorknocking session. But a lot of him being away elsewhere. The visible campaign of David Duguid has essentially stopped. Haven't seen leaflets or social media Lab: Candidate having a great time walking various parts of Aberdeenshire some of which may be in the constituency albeit without actual voters RefUK: No clue
My view is similar: SNP: busy LD: seen no activity myself but have seen your socials and you have talked about limited doorknocking on here Con: were busy, then the Chicken Coup came and printed material has stopped Lab: who? Ref: who?
Tell me where you live and I promise I will come knock on your door...
Interesting thing I hadn't factored into the planning - Sunday observance. Have been strongly advised not to go and canvass on a Sunday.
Would it be wise to look much beyond Sabalenka (3/1), Swiatek (7/2), or Rybakina (9/2)? Possibly not. All three of those odds have reasons to be attractive bets and a case could be made for any of the three.
I’m beginning to think @Sandpit that you were correct about Emma Raducanu when you suggested that her US Open win would prove her to be a one-hit wonder. However, she has shown a bit of form in 2024 especially in the Billie Jean Cup and she will be playing back on grass.
At 33/1, widely available right now, I think she’s worth a flutter.
This is not a proposition that she is going to win Wimbledon. It’s a proposition that 33/1 is worth a casual bet.
She's a serious contender for Wimbledon and 33/1 is a fantastic price.
Radacanu must be the most overhyped tennis player in history. The sponsorships she’s got are just crazy, I can’t believe there has been any ROI.
For sponsorships, she has the twin advantages of being recognisable (now the Williamses have gone, I don't think there's another female tennis player I'd recognise) and easy on the eye.
Sponsorship income equates to more than just overall ability.
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
You do know that Clarkson's Farm is entertainment and not a factual documentary...
The council meetings were actual meetings, and the opposition to everything the local farmers were trying to do to make money, was very real. He’s running a real farm, and his neighbours are running real farms too, constantly worried about how they can avoid bankruptcy, which Clarkson can avoid because he’s got the cameras following him around.
Yes there’s going to be some dramatisation and some storylines, but the fact that farmers across the UK have hailed the show as brilliant tells you it’s a fair reflection of that industry. Many farmers see themselves as custodians of the land, much of which has been with families for many generations, and see it as a vocation as much as a job.
I think farmers seeing themselves as “custodians of the land” can be a bit self-serving. In reality they are multi-million £ capital intensive businesses with a good line in PR.
But that doesn’t make local opposition to perfectly reasonable development any less insane. The world changes & we must change with it. Expecting farmers to preserve their land in aspic because local nimbys like the views is not reasonable.
The Tories own the immigration numbers and can’t run away from that . There’s never been a proper debate in the UK about immigration . The pros and cons .
The irony is of course that EU migration would have dropped regardless of the Brexit vote , that EU nationals are less likely to bring family members and are a net positive for the Treasury.
Many Brits refuse to do jobs in hospitality and agriculture and yet keep moaning about immigration .
If you want much lower migration then some business will go to the wall . If that’s what the Brits want then they should understand the trade offs .
The debate in the EU is different . Free movement isn’t the issue but illegal migration. The Brits have ended up with the worst of all worlds . They lost their FOM rights for bugger all and have seen immigration go up steeply .
I don't like the 'refuse to do' narrative. Most people can't do the low paid stuff because you can't afford to live on it. The wages are poor, the work unreliable/far from civilisation and the career prospects non-existent. Importing a new underclass will only exacerbate the shit conditions relative to professional jobs.
Would it be wise to look much beyond Sabalenka (3/1), Swiatek (7/2), or Rybakina (9/2)? Possibly not. All three of those odds have reasons to be attractive bets and a case could be made for any of the three.
I’m beginning to think @Sandpit that you were correct about Emma Raducanu when you suggested that her US Open win would prove her to be a one-hit wonder. However, she has shown a bit of form in 2024 especially in the Billie Jean Cup and she will be playing back on grass.
At 33/1, widely available right now, I think she’s worth a flutter.
This is not a proposition that she is going to win Wimbledon. It’s a proposition that 33/1 is worth a casual bet.
She's a serious contender for Wimbledon and 33/1 is a fantastic price.
Radacanu must be the most overhyped tennis player in history. The sponsorships she’s got are just crazy, I can’t believe there has been any ROI.
For sponsorships, she has the twin advantages of being recognisable (now the Williamses have gone, I don't think there's another female tennis player I'd recognise) and easy on the eye.
Sponsorship income equates to more than just overall ability.
Yes but she only got the sponsorships after winning. She’s been on the downhill ever since. My point is that they backed her way too early.
Hmmm. Just been forwarded a letter from the police about safety and security during the campaign. Terrorism threat level is SUBSTANTIAL apparently.
Not sure I need to worry about Terrorism. Just angry Nats, of which there are quite a few commenting on my FB adverts with "get out of my town" and "fuck off back to England" etc
One odd comment on our village FB group. The village hall has been bedecked by Saltaires. Some wag tried to complain that the hall should not be used for political propaganda. Erm, its the Fitba, and thats the flag. Not remotely political...
Following your posts, I had a little flutter on you winning your seat at 66/1. So, could you please:
1. Stop posting on here and get out campaigning. I don't imagine there are many PBers in your constituency. 2. Pretend you're Scottish for a few weeks.
If I'm tapping away on here its as a distraction from the endless client project meetings I am in. Campaigning being done digitally, and physically outside work time. Still have two more trips south before polling day.
From what I can see of the campaigns: SNP: Candidate and teams out practically full time LD: Limited doorknocking in selected pockets to dip for mood. Which feeds into digital campaigning specifically targeted on issues. Big spend increase this week with another next week. Last week campaign in plan Con: Has put up pictures of a doorknocking session. But a lot of him being away elsewhere. The visible campaign of David Duguid has essentially stopped. Haven't seen leaflets or social media Lab: Candidate having a great time walking various parts of Aberdeenshire some of which may be in the constituency albeit without actual voters RefUK: No clue
My view is similar: SNP: busy LD: seen no activity myself but have seen your socials and you have talked about limited doorknocking on here Con: were busy, then the Chicken Coup came and printed material has stopped Lab: who? Ref: who?
Tell me where you live and I promise I will come knock on your door...
Interesting thing I hadn't factored into the planning - Sunday observance. Have been strongly advised not to go and canvass on a Sunday.
I think that depends on where in the constituency you're chapping doors. My guess is Sunday's ok in Peterhead town. You can get a lot of doors knocked there but not have too many traditionalists moaning about Jesus. Might not be the most fertile area for Con to Lib Dem switchers, but can't hurt.
They seem to be almost completely out of air defence systems, and those they do have, mostly S300 family, are supposed to be used against enemy bombers and ICBMs, and are totally unsuited to defending smaller airborne threats. Several of the systems themselves have been blown up by HIMARS and ATACMS.
Russian bloggers are claiming the Ukrainian drones are virtually invisible - until they land. Or maybe the head of air defence has many online personae...
Russia is certainly in a dilemma. Crimea is now almost as useless for basing aircraft as it is for surface vessels. The S-300 and S-400 systems are being knocked off as target practice by the Ukrainians. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth a time (although good luck getting any foreign power to pay that, Russia...). Meanwhile, tens of thousands of troops gloomily based there wait for the visiting HIMARS. They COULD be out helping the push towards Kharkiv - but that would leave Crimea open to an assault. Losing Crimea would be terminal to Putin. But keeping it is costing him too - the daily tally of manpower and material of lost under-resourced troops in the north and east is unsustainable.
Putin's strategy of going for broke in the expectation that Ukraine and its backers would have to fold has not worked. Forward momentum to take a village here, a field there has slowed to a snail's pace; they are now more likely to lose hundreds of men and the handful of vehicles they can scrape together to retake acreage they have recently relinquished, rather than make a push forwards. Meanwhile, scarce air defence is getting scarcer. Huge swathes of Russia have nothing to stop drones travelling 1,000 km or more to damage refining plants or manufacturing plant.
It is an absolute mess for Russia. Serves them right!
One thing I'm pondering is whether the 'crossover!' Coverage will provoke any panicked firming up of Tory inclined voters? I'm leaning towards no, but it will be interesting to see
It really could go either way. Either Tories who have been saying reform to pollsters to try and kick Cons into more action suddenly think the message is given and return to the fold or they suddenly think that maybe if lots of people also like reform then they aren’t so bad.
The media have a key roll to play in how it breaks. This morning the bbc radio news was very much saying “Farage has said he is the best alternative to Labour as they beat the Tories in a poll yesterday”. Now the story could equally have been “the Tories have said they are still the best chance to beat Labour after Reform came above them in one of four polls yesterday.
The first version is painting a picture that is a close up of a situation that changes the narrative massively compared to the zoomed out bigger picture of the second spin.
There are still a couple of weeks where the Reform manifesto could be “great” or be absolutely pulverised - it’s going to potentially be in the interests of Labour too to attack them soon. There is also the chance that a lot of skeletons can appear from Reform candidates cupboards (and of course other parties) which might have local push we don’t see on a national level.
There is a fuck of a lot of pontificating on this site from people who are sat at their keyboards and not out knocking on doors, meeting the voters.
So who on here has been pounding the pavements? Own up...
And tell us if your experience matches the polls.
Labour are gonna win bigly. But this is not a strong vote for them. Noone is admitting voting Tory, either acting coyly or saying they won' bother.
So I reckon if Reform learn to campaign and get a leading personality who isn't as creepy as Farage then I can see a lot of these Labour gains going Reform in 2028/2029.
Speaking to journalists on Friday, Rishi Sunak defended Biden: "From what I remember, he went to go and shake all their hands. As far as I’m aware, he went over to talk to some of the the parachutes jumpers to say thank you or hello”
Whomp whomp, Leon gets it wrong again. Trying to pretend that Biden has dementia just makes you look stupid.
Yeah, Biden is fine. You just gotta look at Biden and you know, wow, guy on top of his brief, never rambles in speeches, fit as a fiddle, could pass for 19, like a younger more virile JFK, also he's totally normal, I mean look at this
I genuinly don't understand PB lefties who pretend Biden is fine. Are they worried that if they admit the screamingly obviouS - Biden has serious cognitive decline - it somehow helps Trump? Do they think American media pundits scan PB looking for clues as to the health of their POTUS candidates, and if HorseBatteryWotsit says OK Biden is a senile old coot, then the election is lost?
FWIW I think Trump is ALSO showing major signs of losing it. He rambles much more, his walk and speech are hesitant, his jokes are way less funny. THEY ARE BOTH FAR TOO OLD FOR THE JOB
Green Party: We have a housing crisis! Voters: So you’ll build lots of houses? Green Party: If you elect us we’ll build even fewer houses. Voters: ?!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We must do something! Voters: So you’ll build lots of green power stations then? Green Party: We’re going to cancel nuclear, onshore wind is bad because ruins people’s views & we’re not going to build the power lines to enable offshore wind for the same reason. Oh, and solar is bad too. Voters: ??!!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We will put a carbon tax on everything. Voters: So you’ll put up the tax on petrol / diesel then? Green Party: Our carbon tax will cut the tax on petrol & diesel. Vote for us! Voters: ?????
These people are not serious.
Do you have a link for those?
I wouldn't support Greens nationally, because their beliefs are too dogmatic for me - but some of that does not look like Green policy, perhaps more like a creative interpretation thereof.
Naturally you have to read between the lines a little. The carbon tax they quote works out at less than current taxes on petrol / diesel on the forecourt. The house building rate of < 150k / year is in there too. The power generation section contains the gems about cutting nuclear & the claim that they will provide for grid transfer via off-shore power cables. These are wildly more expensive, less efficient & less reliable than an on-shore long distance power grid. Why aren’t they just building out an on-shore power grid? Well, the manifesto doesn’t say, but it’s because their members apparently don’t like how overground power cables look. Spoils their nice views I believe.
The solar thing is from the reality that the “Greens” have opposed solar farms almost everywhere, and are apparently convinced that rooftop solar is the only valid solar. So instead of building out as much solar as possible, as fast as possible to avert a climate catastrophe they are in favour of slowly building out the most expensive form of solar power known to man. (Not that there’s anything wrong with rooftop solar: it’s great, but on-ground solar on the poorer grades of farmland outperforms it on every metric. Well, except whether nimbys like it I guess?)
The Greens have become even more nimbyish than any other party which, given that they keep banging on about the climate crisis at every opportunity, is the height of hypocrisy imo.
In other words, it is your "creative interpretation" rather than Green Party policies.
Green Party councils & councillors opposing solar farms:
Greens opposing solar farms in AONBs, nature reserves etc doesn't mean they oppose them everywhere. A handful of cherry-picked local examples doesn't mean it's their national policy.
The Green party is a coalition of people opposing various things. If you sum them together, they oppose nearly every form of development.
That's not really true, although their relative success in some rural, typically quite conservative, areas in local elections is undoubtedly at least part to a NIMBYish approach. And there has been a bit of Corbynista infiltration in recent years. I thought Viewcode's excellent Solarpunk article nicely articulated the phiolosophy behind many long-term greens.
To be fair, last night's so called "poll" from YouGov was extrapolated voting intention from the MRP.
It wasn't a new poll in and of itself.
Good spot. Do we need to remind pollsters, media (and PBers) to avoid presenting MRP extrapolations as new polls, and also to avoid subsampling under any circumstances without the use of the Subsample Klaxon? I'm not sure OGH would have ever tolerated such wayward behaviour as we see these days on here @TheScreamingEagles@rcs1000
The Tories own the immigration numbers and can’t run away from that . There’s never been a proper debate in the UK about immigration . The pros and cons .
The irony is of course that EU migration would have dropped regardless of the Brexit vote , that EU nationals are less likely to bring family members and are a net positive for the Treasury.
Many Brits refuse to do jobs in hospitality and agriculture and yet keep moaning about immigration .
If you want much lower migration then some business will go to the wall . If that’s what the Brits want then they should understand the trade offs .
The debate in the EU is different . Free movement isn’t the issue but illegal migration. The Brits have ended up with the worst of all worlds . They lost their FOM rights for bugger all and have seen immigration go up steeply .
I don't like the 'refuse to do' narrative. Most people can't do the low paid stuff because you can't afford to live on it. The wages are poor, the work unreliable/far from civilisation and the career prospects non-existent. Importing a new underclass will only exacerbate the shit conditions relative to professional jobs.
Well up the salaries dramatically and pass the costs on to consumers . Then Brits will moan about that . These are the trade offs which I’m talking about .
One thing I'm pondering is whether the 'crossover!' Coverage will provoke any panicked firming up of Tory inclined voters? I'm leaning towards no, but it will be interesting to see
It really could go either way. Either Tories who have been saying reform to pollsters to try and kick Cons into more action suddenly think the message is given and return to the fold or they suddenly think that maybe if lots of people also like reform then they aren’t so bad.
The media have a key roll to play in how it breaks. This morning the bbc radio news was very much saying “Farage has said he is the best alternative to Labour as they beat the Tories in a poll yesterday”. Now the story could equally have been “the Tories have said they are still the best chance to beat Labour after Reform came above them in one of four polls yesterday.
The first version is painting a picture that is a close up of a situation that changes the narrative massively compared to the zoomed out bigger picture of the second spin.
There are still a couple of weeks where the Reform manifesto could be “great” or be absolutely pulverised - it’s going to potentially be in the interests of Labour too to attack them soon. There is also the chance that a lot of skeletons can appear from Reform candidates cupboards (and of course other parties) which might have local push we don’t see on a national level.
Yes, good points. I think Labour will be more worried by Con breaking to Reform from here as Ref have more upside potential, Con are hamstrung by the vast majority just having had enough of them
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
You do know that Clarkson's Farm is entertainment and not a factual documentary...
The council meetings were actual meetings, and the opposition to everything the local farmers were trying to do to make money, was very real. He’s running a real farm, and his neighbours are running real farms too, constantly worried about how they can avoid bankruptcy, which Clarkson can avoid because he’s got the cameras following him around.
Yes there’s going to be some dramatisation and some storylines, but the fact that farmers across the UK have hailed the show as brilliant tells you it’s a fair reflection of that industry. Many farmers see themselves as custodians of the land, much of which has been with families for many generations, and see it as a vocation as much as a job.
I've spoken to some of the councillors involved in the planning decisions, I know a couple of local farmers, and my kid used to go to the school in Clarkson's village.
There is no undercurrent of West Oxfordshire District Council being out to screw farmers, either in the current rainbow administration or the previous Conservative one (whose Local Plan is still in effect). There is no undercurrent of Chadlington villagers being M&S/Waitrose weenies - they have a real, long-established family-run butchers' shop which sells actual local meat, unlike Clarkson's shop which is 10% stuff grown on the farm and 90% branded stuff made elsewhere.
What happened is broadly (1) WODC said to Clarkson "there are a few difficult things in this application such as access and the AONB constraints, let's see if we can sit down and work through them with your planning consultant", (2) Clarkson said "no thanks", (3) the series was filmed with WODC as the pantomime villains and Clarkson as the put-upon hero.
I'm not going to disagree that the whole situation is unfortunate and that if backs hadn't been put up quite so much then it could all have been handled better, but to restate, it's entertainment and not a snapshot of what "Oxfordshire people... clearly think".
Speaking to journalists on Friday, Rishi Sunak defended Biden: "From what I remember, he went to go and shake all their hands. As far as I’m aware, he went over to talk to some of the the parachutes jumpers to say thank you or hello”
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
You do know that Clarkson's Farm is entertainment and not a factual documentary...
The council meetings were actual meetings, and the opposition to everything the local farmers were trying to do to make money, was very real. He’s running a real farm, and his neighbours are running real farms too, constantly worried about how they can avoid bankruptcy, which Clarkson can avoid because he’s got the cameras following him around.
Yes there’s going to be some dramatisation and some storylines, but the fact that farmers across the UK have hailed the show as brilliant tells you it’s a fair reflection of that industry. Many farmers see themselves as custodians of the land, much of which has been with families for many generations, and see it as a vocation as much as a job.
I think farmers seeing themselves as “custodians of the land” can be a bit self-serving. In reality they are multi-million £ capital intensive businesses with a good line in PR.
But that doesn’t make local opposition to perfectly reasonable development any less insane. The world changes & we must change with it. Expecting farmers to preserve their land in aspic because local nimbys like the views is not reasonable.
I do think we may be under pricing the value of our high grade farm land for future food production. The UK's warmer and wetter version of climate change may produce a more productive land when other countries are suffering v-high temps and draught conditions.
Speaking to journalists on Friday, Rishi Sunak defended Biden: "From what I remember, he went to go and shake all their hands. As far as I’m aware, he went over to talk to some of the the parachutes jumpers to say thank you or hello”
Whomp whomp, Leon gets it wrong again. Trying to pretend that Biden has dementia just makes you look stupid.
Yeah, Biden is fine. You just gotta look at Biden and you know, wow, guy on top of his brief, never rambles in speeches, fit as a fiddle, could pass for 19, like a younger more virile JFK, also he's totally normal, I mean look at this
I genuinly don't understand PB lefties who pretend Biden is fine. Are they worried that if they admit the screamingly obviouS - Biden has serious cognitive decline - it somehow helps Trump? Do they think American media pundits scan PB looking for clues as to the health of their POTUS candidates, and if HorseBatteryWotsit says OK Biden is a senile old coot, then the election is lost?
FWIW I think Trump is ALSO showing major signs of losing it. He rambles much more, his walk and speech are hesitant, his jokes are way less funny. THEY ARE BOTH FAR TOO OLD FOR THE JOB
You are a Trump fanboy.
Is Biden doddery, yes. He’s old. Does he have dementia or not know what’s going on? Very little evidence of that.
I do enjoy people arguing though that the HoL mustn’t be aged capped whilst also saying Biden is too old to serve.
The reality is that the only person who can beat Trump is Biden. Nobody else can.
Whatever you say, what Biden has actually done is good. He’s been an objectively good President. The fact he’s smart enough to delegate big decisions shows more for his cognitive function than you would like to believe
So no, I am not embarrassed. I’d rather have somebody else but there is nobody else.
To be fair, last night's so called "poll" from YouGov was extrapolated voting intention from the MRP.
It wasn't a new poll in and of itself.
Good spot. Do we need to remind pollsters, media (and PBers) to avoid presenting MRP extrapolations as new polls, and also to avoid subsampling under any circumstances without the use of the Subsample Klaxon? I'm not sure OGH would have ever tolerated such wayward behaviour as we see these days on here @TheScreamingEagles@rcs1000
It was a bona fide poll, conducted on the 12th and 13th of June.
Hmmm. Just been forwarded a letter from the police about safety and security during the campaign. Terrorism threat level is SUBSTANTIAL apparently.
Not sure I need to worry about Terrorism. Just angry Nats, of which there are quite a few commenting on my FB adverts with "get out of my town" and "fuck off back to England" etc
One odd comment on our village FB group. The village hall has been bedecked by Saltaires. Some wag tried to complain that the hall should not be used for political propaganda. Erm, its the Fitba, and thats the flag. Not remotely political...
I have avoided this topic entirely because I find it so toxic and this place is not my kind of natural demographic (I’m on here for betting reasons, so no offence meant). And I certainly do not want to light a touch paper.
However, I did encounter something I found very strange c. 18 months ago.
I was moving house and selling a few things which included a fairly new John Lewis mattress. I advertised on FB marketplace and the first person to respond clinched the sale. She sent a driver around with the cash to collect it.
I thought little more about it until 24 hours later she messaged me to say she wasn’t satisfied with the quality and wanted her money back. I was a bit taken aback (JLP aren’t usually rubbish) but I told her that was fine. Return the mattress and I’d refund her. Her reply was this:
’I am a Nigerian nurse who has come over here to work in your Health Service in response to your Government advertising in my country for people to come and help out in Britain. I have no money and I am doing you all a service so please give me the mattress for free.'
I was, and still am, on several levels astonished.
Not unusual for Nigerians to be grifters and scammers. Hard to believe anyone would sell or buy a secondhand mattress, pretty disgusting to me.
Green Party: We have a housing crisis! Voters: So you’ll build lots of houses? Green Party: If you elect us we’ll build even fewer houses. Voters: ?!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We must do something! Voters: So you’ll build lots of green power stations then? Green Party: We’re going to cancel nuclear, onshore wind is bad because ruins people’s views & we’re not going to build the power lines to enable offshore wind for the same reason. Oh, and solar is bad too. Voters: ??!!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We will put a carbon tax on everything. Voters: So you’ll put up the tax on petrol / diesel then? Green Party: Our carbon tax will cut the tax on petrol & diesel. Vote for us! Voters: ?????
These people are not serious.
Do you have a link for those?
I wouldn't support Greens nationally, because their beliefs are too dogmatic for me - but some of that does not look like Green policy, perhaps more like a creative interpretation thereof.
Naturally you have to read between the lines a little. The carbon tax they quote works out at less than current taxes on petrol / diesel on the forecourt. The house building rate of < 150k / year is in there too. The power generation section contains the gems about cutting nuclear & the claim that they will provide for grid transfer via off-shore power cables. These are wildly more expensive, less efficient & less reliable than an on-shore long distance power grid. Why aren’t they just building out an on-shore power grid? Well, the manifesto doesn’t say, but it’s because their members apparently don’t like how overground power cables look. Spoils their nice views I believe.
The solar thing is from the reality that the “Greens” have opposed solar farms almost everywhere, and are apparently convinced that rooftop solar is the only valid solar. So instead of building out as much solar as possible, as fast as possible to avert a climate catastrophe they are in favour of slowly building out the most expensive form of solar power known to man. (Not that there’s anything wrong with rooftop solar: it’s great, but on-ground solar on the poorer grades of farmland outperforms it on every metric. Well, except whether nimbys like it I guess?)
The Greens have become even more nimbyish than any other party which, given that they keep banging on about the climate crisis at every opportunity, is the height of hypocrisy imo.
A FOAF is moving his family farm away from pure farming - the extensive outbuilding quadrangle is now a small business centre. He is going into solar farming in a big way - has sheep grazing under and around the panels. The sheep keep the grass mowed and the chap looking after the sheep keeps an eye on the state of things. His guesstimate is that the panels don't reduce the number of sheep you can have on the land, noticeably.
What's not to like?
If you talk the people living in the villages west of Oxford? Everything apparently. Solar panels are the end of the world & they’d rather have a agricultural single-crop monoculture with no wildlife anywhere to be seen.
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
Those are the incomers. In Wiltshire, you had people specifically angry at the idea of jobs for the locals. Because this would raise the price of labour locally, and it would cost more to get someone to do the gardening.
No, literally.
And these were self proclaimed LibDems/Greens.
Jeez, and Topping has the gall to call out the credibility of my anecdotes!
@TOPPING seems to be ready to jump on any anecdote that doesn’t fit his narrowly-conceived view of the world.
It’s always the danger in an echo chamber. Someone comes along with an alternate reality and they feel threatened and get personally abusive, aggressive even.
I’ll leave it there.
I am Champions League
You gave an absurd anecdote and sulked when you were called out on it.
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
You do know that Clarkson's Farm is entertainment and not a factual documentary...
The council meetings were actual meetings, and the opposition to everything the local farmers were trying to do to make money, was very real. He’s running a real farm, and his neighbours are running real farms too, constantly worried about how they can avoid bankruptcy, which Clarkson can avoid because he’s got the cameras following him around.
Yes there’s going to be some dramatisation and some storylines, but the fact that farmers across the UK have hailed the show as brilliant tells you it’s a fair reflection of that industry. Many farmers see themselves as custodians of the land, much of which has been with families for many generations, and see it as a vocation as much as a job.
I've spoken to some of the councillors involved in the planning decisions, I know a couple of local farmers, and my kid used to go to the school in Clarkson's village.
There is no undercurrent of West Oxfordshire District Council being out to screw farmers, either in the current rainbow administration or the previous Conservative one (whose Local Plan is still in effect). There is no undercurrent of Chadlington villagers being M&S/Waitrose weenies - they have a real, long-established family-run butchers' shop which sells actual local meat, unlike Clarkson's shop which is 10% stuff grown on the farm and 90% branded stuff made elsewhere.
What happened is broadly (1) WODC said to Clarkson "there are a few difficult things in this application such as access and the AONB constraints, let's see if we can sit down and work through them with your planning consultant", (2) Clarkson said "no thanks", (3) the series was filmed with WODC as the pantomime villains and Clarkson as the put-upon hero.
I'm not going to disagree that the whole situation is unfortunate and that if backs hadn't been put up quite so much then it could all have been handled better, but to restate, it's entertainment and not a snapshot of what "Oxfordshire people... clearly think".
Fair enough, you’re a lot closer to it than I am. But what did the council think would happen, when they decided to let Clarkson’s cameras into a meeting where they were going to tell him to do one?
To be fair, last night's so called "poll" from YouGov was extrapolated voting intention from the MRP.
It wasn't a new poll in and of itself.
Good spot. Do we need to remind pollsters, media (and PBers) to avoid presenting MRP extrapolations as new polls, and also to avoid subsampling under any circumstances without the use of the Subsample Klaxon? I'm not sure OGH would have ever tolerated such wayward behaviour as we see these days on here @TheScreamingEagles@rcs1000
It was a bona fide poll, conducted on the 12th and 13th of June.
According to @Stodge it was not. It was an MRP extrapolation.
Would it be wise to look much beyond Sabalenka (3/1), Swiatek (7/2), or Rybakina (9/2)? Possibly not. All three of those odds have reasons to be attractive bets and a case could be made for any of the three.
I’m beginning to think @Sandpit that you were correct about Emma Raducanu when you suggested that her US Open win would prove her to be a one-hit wonder. However, she has shown a bit of form in 2024 especially in the Billie Jean Cup and she will be playing back on grass.
At 33/1, widely available right now, I think she’s worth a flutter.
This is not a proposition that she is going to win Wimbledon. It’s a proposition that 33/1 is worth a casual bet.
She's a serious contender for Wimbledon and 33/1 is a fantastic price.
Radacanu must be the most overhyped tennis player in history. The sponsorships she’s got are just crazy, I can’t believe there has been any ROI.
For sponsorships, she has the twin advantages of being recognisable (now the Williamses have gone, I don't think there's another female tennis player I'd recognise) and easy on the eye.
Sponsorship income equates to more than just overall ability.
Yes but she only got the sponsorships after winning. She’s been on the downhill ever since. My point is that they backed her way too early.
A shame about Raducanu. She gets a lot of flak which I think is really undeserved. I don’t blame her for making hay when the opportunities came through to her. I do think she has also been unlucky with injury but it’s also clear she was far from the finished article when she won the US Open and I think there is real resilience training needed. But hey, she doesn’t owe anything to anyone and she’s done something very few people will ever do in winning a tennis grand slam.
Speaking to journalists on Friday, Rishi Sunak defended Biden: "From what I remember, he went to go and shake all their hands. As far as I’m aware, he went over to talk to some of the the parachutes jumpers to say thank you or hello”
Whomp whomp, Leon gets it wrong again. Trying to pretend that Biden has dementia just makes you look stupid.
Yeah, Biden is fine. You just gotta look at Biden and you know, wow, guy on top of his brief, never rambles in speeches, fit as a fiddle, could pass for 19, like a younger more virile JFK, also he's totally normal, I mean look at this
I genuinly don't understand PB lefties who pretend Biden is fine. Are they worried that if they admit the screamingly obviouS - Biden has serious cognitive decline - it somehow helps Trump? Do they think American media pundits scan PB looking for clues as to the health of their POTUS candidates, and if HorseBatteryWotsit says OK Biden is a senile old coot, then the election is lost?
FWIW I think Trump is ALSO showing major signs of losing it. He rambles much more, his walk and speech are hesitant, his jokes are way less funny. THEY ARE BOTH FAR TOO OLD FOR THE JOB
My mum is 86, and she displays all the traits that Biden does-stumbles, occasionally incoherent, chuckles for no reason, freezes during conversations, confusion. Sometimes she's razor sharp, other times batshit crazy. How anyone can say that Biden is fully able to function as president is as barmy as my mum is. The fella is too old, and Trump is just as bad, as well as being, well, Trump!
I have avoided this topic entirely because I find it so toxic and this place is not my kind of natural demographic (I’m on here for betting reasons, so no offence meant). And I certainly do not want to light a touch paper.
However, I did encounter something I found very strange c. 18 months ago.
I was moving house and selling a few things which included a fairly new John Lewis mattress. I advertised on FB marketplace and the first person to respond clinched the sale. She sent a driver around with the cash to collect it.
I thought little more about it until 24 hours later she messaged me to say she wasn’t satisfied with the quality and wanted her money back. I was a bit taken aback (JLP aren’t usually rubbish) but I told her that was fine. Return the mattress and I’d refund her. Her reply was this:
’I am a Nigerian nurse who has come over here to work in your Health Service in response to your Government advertising in my country for people to come and help out in Britain. I have no money and I am doing you all a service so please give me the mattress for free.'
I was, and still am, on several levels astonished.
You obviously told her to get f@#ked?
I did.
For the benefit of Topping the startling part is obviously what she said. It’s sad that I have to spell it out, but for starters it wasn’t just her attitude: that somehow she had come to this country in order to help us out and was doing us a favour, that should mean freebies.
It was that the Government were recruiting Nigerian workers to make up for the (obvious) fact that others had left.
Where was this mentioned by the Leave campaign????
It was one personal encounter with what has clearly for many people become a serious issue: net migration.
And I’m a left-leaning person who loves multi-culturalism here. But there’s clearly a problem. We have totally fed Farage and us centrists ignore that at our grave peril.
You do realise we’ve been poaching labour for the NHS from commonwealth countries overseas since well before Brexit? They speak English, often have equivalent training, and will take the wages we offer. We recruit them because it takes a while to recruit and train them locally, so taking someone mid-career is an easy sugar fix. Zero link to Brexit.
Indeed, it’s been going on for decades.
Recruiting from overseas works in the short term to free up capacity, but long term we need more training places in the UK, and not have students in subjects like nursing getting into debt for a ‘degree’.
The BMA have until very recently been utterly opposed to more medical school places, preferring to encourage scarcity of doctors.
One of my pet ideas is to open a “British Hospital” somewhere like Mumbai or Manila, staffed at the top end by retired British doctors and managers doing it for a couple of years, and existing primarily to train up thousands of locals with UK-recognised qualifications that lead to visas. It also provides a service to the local population, and avoids taking mid-career professionals out of the country.
Medical school snootiness is a real issue. Doctors don’t need to be straight A students at A-level. They need good memories and a set of less academic competencies. However medical schools only favour the former.
One of my partner's daughter's best friends is...
Gold standard PB anecdote source.
My partner's daughter lives with us, and her friend is a regular visitor to our house. It's not that tenuous.
She is a first hand example of someone who gained a place at medical school despite having less than stellar A level grades. This is evidence that you don't actually need top grades to get into medical school in the UK, contradicting the claim made by the poster to whom I was responding.
Sigh….
I’m sure you’re telling the truth and your friend’s daughter found a way, but shall we inject some facts:
Page 12 - straight As required. But there are interviews and “broadening participation” stuff which probably helped her.
Overall though - straight As.
You are clearly unaware of the existence of A* grades.
Why do you say that? It’s not based on anything I have posted. My first post talks about “straight As” and the document I linked to has a minimum of…. all As.
If I had meant “all A*s I would have written it”…. I spend a lot of my life dealing with 18 year olds. I suspect far more than you do.
Speaking to journalists on Friday, Rishi Sunak defended Biden: "From what I remember, he went to go and shake all their hands. As far as I’m aware, he went over to talk to some of the the parachutes jumpers to say thank you or hello”
Green Party: We have a housing crisis! Voters: So you’ll build lots of houses? Green Party: If you elect us we’ll build even fewer houses. Voters: ?!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We must do something! Voters: So you’ll build lots of green power stations then? Green Party: We’re going to cancel nuclear, onshore wind is bad because ruins people’s views & we’re not going to build the power lines to enable offshore wind for the same reason. Oh, and solar is bad too. Voters: ??!!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We will put a carbon tax on everything. Voters: So you’ll put up the tax on petrol / diesel then? Green Party: Our carbon tax will cut the tax on petrol & diesel. Vote for us! Voters: ?????
These people are not serious.
Do you have a link for those?
I wouldn't support Greens nationally, because their beliefs are too dogmatic for me - but some of that does not look like Green policy, perhaps more like a creative interpretation thereof.
Naturally you have to read between the lines a little. The carbon tax they quote works out at less than current taxes on petrol / diesel on the forecourt. The house building rate of < 150k / year is in there too. The power generation section contains the gems about cutting nuclear & the claim that they will provide for grid transfer via off-shore power cables. These are wildly more expensive, less efficient & less reliable than an on-shore long distance power grid. Why aren’t they just building out an on-shore power grid? Well, the manifesto doesn’t say, but it’s because their members apparently don’t like how overground power cables look. Spoils their nice views I believe.
The solar thing is from the reality that the “Greens” have opposed solar farms almost everywhere, and are apparently convinced that rooftop solar is the only valid solar. So instead of building out as much solar as possible, as fast as possible to avert a climate catastrophe they are in favour of slowly building out the most expensive form of solar power known to man. (Not that there’s anything wrong with rooftop solar: it’s great, but on-ground solar on the poorer grades of farmland outperforms it on every metric. Well, except whether nimbys like it I guess?)
The Greens have become even more nimbyish than any other party which, given that they keep banging on about the climate crisis at every opportunity, is the height of hypocrisy imo.
A FOAF is moving his family farm away from pure farming - the extensive outbuilding quadrangle is now a small business centre. He is going into solar farming in a big way - has sheep grazing under and around the panels. The sheep keep the grass mowed and the chap looking after the sheep keeps an eye on the state of things. His guesstimate is that the panels don't reduce the number of sheep you can have on the land, noticeably.
What's not to like?
Veering slightly off topic, I have often wondered whether for solar farms, the economics would add up of putting solar on turntables - and using some of the power generated to aim the solar panel at the sun. It feels like this would be more efficient - you would make more in energy than you would lose in powering the movement. But perhaps the capital costs would be unrealistic.
When solar panels were really expensive, tracking was a thing. Now they're cheap, it's not.
One thing I'm pondering is whether the 'crossover!' Coverage will provoke any panicked firming up of Tory inclined voters? I'm leaning towards no, but it will be interesting to see
The key recent opinion poll result from about a week ago, was that current Tory voters prefer Farage to Sunak. So most would seem primed to jump ship if Farage looks like the better bet to hold off Labour.
A Reform-Tory split of 19-18 might rapidly head towards 28-9.
One factor that might put a dampener on this, as Leon has reported, is that Farage himself is only standing in one seat, and most of the Reform candidates will likely be less appealing than the Tory candidates.
And then, of course, what is the true level of Reform support? YouGov have crossover, but Survation and More in Common still have a near 2:1 advantage for the Tories over Reform. (25-13 and 23-12, respectively)
Hmmm. Just been forwarded a letter from the police about safety and security during the campaign. Terrorism threat level is SUBSTANTIAL apparently.
Not sure I need to worry about Terrorism. Just angry Nats, of which there are quite a few commenting on my FB adverts with "get out of my town" and "fuck off back to England" etc
One odd comment on our village FB group. The village hall has been bedecked by Saltaires. Some wag tried to complain that the hall should not be used for political propaganda. Erm, its the Fitba, and thats the flag. Not remotely political...
Sounds more like you are well liked when you are getting the banter, they will be worried you will be stealing their sheep off them.
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
You do know that Clarkson's Farm is entertainment and not a factual documentary...
The council meetings were actual meetings, and the opposition to everything the local farmers were trying to do to make money, was very real. He’s running a real farm, and his neighbours are running real farms too, constantly worried about how they can avoid bankruptcy, which Clarkson can avoid because he’s got the cameras following him around.
Yes there’s going to be some dramatisation and some storylines, but the fact that farmers across the UK have hailed the show as brilliant tells you it’s a fair reflection of that industry. Many farmers see themselves as custodians of the land, much of which has been with families for many generations, and see it as a vocation as much as a job.
The reason that Clarkson's Farm can avoid bankruptcy is the large fees he makes for... Clarkson's Farm. The actual business of Clarkson's Farm is a side hustle.
That being said, diversification and specialisation are the classic way to save farms.
He is lucky in that he has other income so is in a position to run the farm as a control trial to show what in theory the profitability of such activity is. When in the first season I believe he made a profit of 24p or somesuch, rather than that affect his livelihood, as it does so many farmers, many of whom exit either the business or take their own lives as a result, he could show us the reality of running a farm.
That is an extraordinarily valuable thing and he is to be commended. No surprise that farmers adore him.
Would it be wise to look much beyond Sabalenka (3/1), Swiatek (7/2), or Rybakina (9/2)? Possibly not. All three of those odds have reasons to be attractive bets and a case could be made for any of the three.
I’m beginning to think @Sandpit that you were correct about Emma Raducanu when you suggested that her US Open win would prove her to be a one-hit wonder. However, she has shown a bit of form in 2024 especially in the Billie Jean Cup and she will be playing back on grass.
At 33/1, widely available right now, I think she’s worth a flutter.
This is not a proposition that she is going to win Wimbledon. It’s a proposition that 33/1 is worth a casual bet.
She's a serious contender for Wimbledon and 33/1 is a fantastic price.
Radacanu must be the most overhyped tennis player in history. The sponsorships she’s got are just crazy, I can’t believe there has been any ROI.
For sponsorships, she has the twin advantages of being recognisable (now the Williamses have gone, I don't think there's another female tennis player I'd recognise) and easy on the eye.
Sponsorship income equates to more than just overall ability.
Yes but she only got the sponsorships after winning. She’s been on the downhill ever since. My point is that they backed her way too early.
A shame about Raducanu. She gets a lot of flak which I think is really undeserved. I don’t blame her for making hay when the opportunities came through to her. I do think she has also been unlucky with injury but it’s also clear she was far from the finished article when she won the US Open and I think there is real resilience training needed. But hey, she doesn’t owe anything to anyone and she’s done something very few people will ever do in winning a tennis grand slam.
If any of us could make millions out of sponsorships from outfits with money to burn making useless overpriced products we would take the chance while we could.
I hope ER will be more than a one hit wonder, but if she is....that's life. Who remembers anything or anyone else from 'Bob Massie's Test Match' in 1972.
Would it be wise to look much beyond Sabalenka (3/1), Swiatek (7/2), or Rybakina (9/2)? Possibly not. All three of those odds have reasons to be attractive bets and a case could be made for any of the three.
I’m beginning to think @Sandpit that you were correct about Emma Raducanu when you suggested that her US Open win would prove her to be a one-hit wonder. However, she has shown a bit of form in 2024 especially in the Billie Jean Cup and she will be playing back on grass.
At 33/1, widely available right now, I think she’s worth a flutter.
This is not a proposition that she is going to win Wimbledon. It’s a proposition that 33/1 is worth a casual bet.
They seem to be almost completely out of air defence systems, and those they do have, mostly S300 family, are supposed to be used against enemy bombers and ICBMs, and are totally unsuited to defending smaller airborne threats. Several of the systems themselves have been blown up by HIMARS and ATACMS.
Russian bloggers are claiming the Ukrainian drones are virtually invisible - until they land. Or maybe the head of air defence has many online personae...
Russia is certainly in a dilemma. Crimea is now almost as useless for basing aircraft as it is for surface vessels. The S-300 and S-400 systems are being knocked off as target practice by the Ukrainians. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth a time (although good luck getting any foreign power to pay that, Russia...). Meanwhile, tens of thousands of troops gloomily based there wait for the visiting HIMARS. They COULD be out helping the push towards Kharkiv - but that would leave Crimea open to an assault. Losing Crimea would be terminal to Putin. But keeping it is costing him too - the daily tally of manpower and material of lost under-resourced troops in the north and east is unsustainable.
Putin's strategy of going for broke in the expectation that Ukraine and its backers would have to fold has not worked. Forward momentum to take a village here, a field there has slowed to a snail's pace; they are now more likely to lose hundreds of men and the handful of vehicles they can scrape together to retake acreage they have recently relinquished, rather than make a push forwards. Meanwhile, scarce air defence is getting scarcer. Huge swathes of Russia have nothing to stop drones travelling 1,000 km or more to damage refining plants or manufacturing plant.
It is an absolute mess for Russia. Serves them right!
Yup, a total mess for Russia.
The various Ukranian drones, from the cheap cardboard ones aimed at tanks, to much larger ones resembling light aircraft but without the man inside, have totally changed the direction of the war. The rest of the world can also learn from what Ukraine has achieved in only a couple of years, using hobby drones for reconnaissance and to spot for artillery, using them to carry grenades, and now using them to take out planes at airfields hundreds of miles away.
I’d like to think that, if I were Ukranian, I’d be a drone pilot. I know how to fly a plane, and understand the physics, but am too old and too unfit to go to the Top Gun school.
Thankfully, Western resolve to defeat Putin is still there, and it feels closer to the end in the last few days than it has in a long time.
Green Party: We have a housing crisis! Voters: So you’ll build lots of houses? Green Party: If you elect us we’ll build even fewer houses. Voters: ?!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We must do something! Voters: So you’ll build lots of green power stations then? Green Party: We’re going to cancel nuclear, onshore wind is bad because ruins people’s views & we’re not going to build the power lines to enable offshore wind for the same reason. Oh, and solar is bad too. Voters: ??!!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We will put a carbon tax on everything. Voters: So you’ll put up the tax on petrol / diesel then? Green Party: Our carbon tax will cut the tax on petrol & diesel. Vote for us! Voters: ?????
These people are not serious.
Do you have a link for those?
I wouldn't support Greens nationally, because their beliefs are too dogmatic for me - but some of that does not look like Green policy, perhaps more like a creative interpretation thereof.
Naturally you have to read between the lines a little. The carbon tax they quote works out at less than current taxes on petrol / diesel on the forecourt. The house building rate of < 150k / year is in there too. The power generation section contains the gems about cutting nuclear & the claim that they will provide for grid transfer via off-shore power cables. These are wildly more expensive, less efficient & less reliable than an on-shore long distance power grid. Why aren’t they just building out an on-shore power grid? Well, the manifesto doesn’t say, but it’s because their members apparently don’t like how overground power cables look. Spoils their nice views I believe.
The solar thing is from the reality that the “Greens” have opposed solar farms almost everywhere, and are apparently convinced that rooftop solar is the only valid solar. So instead of building out as much solar as possible, as fast as possible to avert a climate catastrophe they are in favour of slowly building out the most expensive form of solar power known to man. (Not that there’s anything wrong with rooftop solar: it’s great, but on-ground solar on the poorer grades of farmland outperforms it on every metric. Well, except whether nimbys like it I guess?)
The Greens have become even more nimbyish than any other party which, given that they keep banging on about the climate crisis at every opportunity, is the height of hypocrisy imo.
In other words, it is your "creative interpretation" rather than Green Party policies.
Green Party councils & councillors opposing solar farms:
Greens opposing solar farms in AONBs, nature reserves etc doesn't mean they oppose them everywhere. A handful of cherry-picked local examples doesn't mean it's their national policy.
Are we in a climate emergency or not? If we are then building out easily reversible solar farms in AONBs is just fine: It’s literally just lines of solar panels on steel frames in the grass & you can graze sheep underneath them. Opposing them is the height of hypocrisy frankly.
Greens at 9% and SNP 3% in Matt Goodwin's latest poll. Data tables now up on his website.
He has a massive gender split in party support. C-L-R of 14-47-12 among women and 23-33-21 among men.
As I've commented before, Reform is a blokeish party with little appeal to most women. I think, fortuitously, that puts a bit of a cap on the level they can reach.
The gender gap is smaller with other pollsters, but it still exists. Given that women line significantly longer than men, and so make up a disproportionately large fraction of the retired population, it's surprising to have such a gender split combined with the age split.
In YouGov, for example, Labour have a 21pp lead among women, and a 17pp lead among men, but the Tories do have a marginally higher share among women (18 v 17). The difference is explained by the larger Labour gender split (39 v 34) with Reform splitting the other way (14 v 24).
This is a potential challenge for any possible future New Farage Tory Party.
Are these weighted samples or are you subsampling? (If the latter please sound the Subsample Klaxon, Mr Password)...
They're all subsamples unless discovering stated otherwise.
Subsamples should always be marked as such. You should know that, being from Scotland!! Just ask @StuartDickson
Nah mate, nah, nah, nah. I iz from Sowf Lundun innit? Yoo 'avin' a larf? Scotlund woz jus' sumwhere I 'ad my gaff fer a while. I ain't from dere, know what I mean?
Would it be wise to look much beyond Sabalenka (3/1), Swiatek (7/2), or Rybakina (9/2)? Possibly not. All three of those odds have reasons to be attractive bets and a case could be made for any of the three.
I’m beginning to think @Sandpit that you were correct about Emma Raducanu when you suggested that her US Open win would prove her to be a one-hit wonder. However, she has shown a bit of form in 2024 especially in the Billie Jean Cup and she will be playing back on grass.
At 33/1, widely available right now, I think she’s worth a flutter.
This is not a proposition that she is going to win Wimbledon. It’s a proposition that 33/1 is worth a casual bet.
Raducanu could not beat a carpet.
Rick Astley and Emma Raducanu, king and queen of the one-hit wonder.
Hope she’s invested some of her sponsorship millions, because she’s got a lot of life left to live.
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
You do know that Clarkson's Farm is entertainment and not a factual documentary...
The council meetings were actual meetings, and the opposition to everything the local farmers were trying to do to make money, was very real. He’s running a real farm, and his neighbours are running real farms too, constantly worried about how they can avoid bankruptcy, which Clarkson can avoid because he’s got the cameras following him around.
Yes there’s going to be some dramatisation and some storylines, but the fact that farmers across the UK have hailed the show as brilliant tells you it’s a fair reflection of that industry. Many farmers see themselves as custodians of the land, much of which has been with families for many generations, and see it as a vocation as much as a job.
I think farmers seeing themselves as “custodians of the land” can be a bit self-serving. In reality they are multi-million £ capital intensive businesses with a good line in PR.
But that doesn’t make local opposition to perfectly reasonable development any less insane. The world changes & we must change with it. Expecting farmers to preserve their land in aspic because local nimbys like the views is not reasonable.
I do think we may be under pricing the value of our high grade farm land for future food production. The UK's warmer and wetter version of climate change may produce a more productive land when other countries are suffering v-high temps and draught conditions.
The neat thing about solar farms is how easily reversible they are: You can stick the panels & frames on the back of a bunch of flatbed trucks & take them to another field somewhere else whenever you want, so long as you can finagle a grid connection.
To be fair, last night's so called "poll" from YouGov was extrapolated voting intention from the MRP.
It wasn't a new poll in and of itself.
Good spot. Do we need to remind pollsters, media (and PBers) to avoid presenting MRP extrapolations as new polls, and also to avoid subsampling under any circumstances without the use of the Subsample Klaxon? I'm not sure OGH would have ever tolerated such wayward behaviour as we see these days on here @TheScreamingEagles@rcs1000
They're new polls. I don't understand stodge's objection. They use a different weighting method for processing the sample, which is the same as that used in the MRP, but that doesn't make them not a poll.
The Tories own the immigration numbers and can’t run away from that . There’s never been a proper debate in the UK about immigration . The pros and cons .
The irony is of course that EU migration would have dropped regardless of the Brexit vote , that EU nationals are less likely to bring family members and are a net positive for the Treasury.
Many Brits refuse to do jobs in hospitality and agriculture and yet keep moaning about immigration .
If you want much lower migration then some business will go to the wall . If that’s what the Brits want then they should understand the trade offs .
The debate in the EU is different . Free movement isn’t the issue but illegal migration. The Brits have ended up with the worst of all worlds . They lost their FOM rights for bugger all and have seen immigration go up steeply .
I don't like the 'refuse to do' narrative. Most people can't do the low paid stuff because you can't afford to live on it. The wages are poor, the work unreliable/far from civilisation and the career prospects non-existent. Importing a new underclass will only exacerbate the shit conditions relative to professional jobs.
Why do it when you get more on benefits for doing nothing
“We can negotiate a ceasefire tomorrow” (If Ukranian soldiers withdraw on current boundaries, and Ukraine says they’ll never join NATO)
“The G7 security agreements are ‘just pieces of paper’.” (They’re commitments to billions in military aid).
“Western ‘theft’ of Russian assets shows that ‘anyone’ could be next” (Anyone who invades another European country, maybe).
“I never planned to storm Kiev” (but the vehicles blown up in the original assault south from Chernobyl contained a load of military #1 uniforms and large Russian flags)
Would it be wise to look much beyond Sabalenka (3/1), Swiatek (7/2), or Rybakina (9/2)? Possibly not. All three of those odds have reasons to be attractive bets and a case could be made for any of the three.
I’m beginning to think @Sandpit that you were correct about Emma Raducanu when you suggested that her US Open win would prove her to be a one-hit wonder. However, she has shown a bit of form in 2024 especially in the Billie Jean Cup and she will be playing back on grass.
At 33/1, widely available right now, I think she’s worth a flutter.
This is not a proposition that she is going to win Wimbledon. It’s a proposition that 33/1 is worth a casual bet.
She's a serious contender for Wimbledon and 33/1 is a fantastic price.
Radacanu must be the most overhyped tennis player in history. The sponsorships she’s got are just crazy, I can’t believe there has been any ROI.
For sponsorships, she has the twin advantages of being recognisable (now the Williamses have gone, I don't think there's another female tennis player I'd recognise) and easy on the eye.
Sponsorship income equates to more than just overall ability.
Yes but she only got the sponsorships after winning. She’s been on the downhill ever since. My point is that they backed her way too early.
A shame about Raducanu. She gets a lot of flak which I think is really undeserved. I don’t blame her for making hay when the opportunities came through to her. I do think she has also been unlucky with injury but it’s also clear she was far from the finished article when she won the US Open and I think there is real resilience training needed. But hey, she doesn’t owe anything to anyone and she’s done something very few people will ever do in winning a tennis grand slam.
She is photogenic ( many of them look like the back end of a horse ) and the sponsors will be doing all right out of her. Good luck to her.
I think what I am seeing with a lot of comments on here is 'centrist denial' and this could actually have some betting implications. People are reading the current situation in an essentially 20th century way ie what is happening on the right is 'extremists' 'splitting' and who will become increasingly irrellevant over time. This overlooks what has been happening over the last decade on a global scale with the rise of insurgent political movements that disrupt political norms- Brexit, Trump, Italy, France, Germany, the list goes on.
What seems apparent to me is that we are seeing the final death through incoherance and exhaustion of the 'broad church' conservative party and the creation of a more coherent right wing political movement which can, like everything else that has happened globally, begin as a ridiculed insurgency but end up close to, or achieving power, building on dissatisfaction with the inevitable failings of the 'centrist, managerial status quo'. It is a small jump from 30% to 40% but the latter can win a general election under the FPTP system.
It may not be 'reform' that carries this insurgency forward. It could be a revised version of the Conservative Party having dumped the Hunts, Sunaks and Mordaunts. Or a 'start up' party of the type Cummings suggests. But to just assume all this is irrelevant extremism just seems to be an act of enormous denial given what is happening on a global scale.
The analysis on here is fucking pitiful, if I am honest. Really really feeble. For all the reasons you state, it is a bunch of middle aged and frankly geriatric twats looking hopefully at reality through a 20th century prism, and with quite low watt IQ levels to illuminate the view
Idiots
And I speak as a late middle aged twat, but at least I'm not wearing the Goggles of Denial
Why do you come here? I don't think you're universally liked on here, and you seem to despise us. So why not fuck off? I think you'd be happier. I know I would be. Go on, do it. Sling your hook. What have you got to lose?
See. That's EXACTLY why I come here. To really wind up people like you. And I REALLY do wind you up, don't I?
If this was actually a pub I reckon you'd have angrily asked me outside at least eight times by now, in a frothing, slightly insane way, as the barman rolls his eyes and tells you to chill out, Farooq, not again, fer fucks sake
Yes, you do wind me up, but not always the times you're trying to. I think you've got a 10% hit rate. But let's not focus on me, let's think about you. I'm not offering you a fight outside the pub, I'm saying you really don't seem to like the people in here. You seem really quite miserable about how stupid we all are. So go. There's the door. You don't ever have to read a single thing any of us say ever again. You're better than us, go find a more elevated place. You won't miss us.
You're misunderestimating Leon. And PB. It's a big family and you can't tell your co-worker/boss/underling/agent to go fuck themselves so you tell your actual family. Except, because you are not six years old, you can't tell your family either. So you tell PB.
It is weirdly true. Occasionally I let a PB-er get under my skin (or at least I used to, it happens rarely now, if ever)
eg I remember being seriously angry that NPXMP laughed about the way the EU Constitution was blithely passed without a public vote, by means of Labour's double dealing. I thought this was tantamount to treachery and the laughter made it all so much worse, I was like @Farooq asking me outside, I wanted to give NPXMP a slap, literally.....
Looking back 1. Yes I was right, it was stupid, we Brexited because of the stupid crap Labour did on the EU and 2. Who carew? Why did I get so angry? Why did @NickPalmer wind me up so much??
Now I am rather fond of the old fella. I was sad to hear of his medical news - a minor stroke. I hope he is OK. If Nick is reading - hope you're OK! I would like to see him canvassing the fearful streets of Surrey for another two decades, and telling us all about his promising returns
And now I am getting sentimental and there is another air raid siren. That really IS a signal for me to go to work, and ignore the air raid siren
Ta-ra
Nick had a stroke? I had missed that. Best wished Nick - yes, hope he's recovering and will be with us for a while yet. NPMP as he was then was the first person to interact with me on pb.com, I think.
I hadn't heard that either. Best wishes to @NickPalmer for a speedy recovery. Don't work too hard sir and hope to see you back on the site soon.
Thanks! The stroke was reasonably serious (4 days completely blotted out from my memory, but apparently I was in hospital), but it's left few physical marks - a tendency to want to sleep in the day now and then. Mentally it's left gaps when I'm tired - I was puzzling over the names of close relatives last night, which seem absolutely clear now - but I'm gradually returning to normal.
I have avoided this topic entirely because I find it so toxic and this place is not my kind of natural demographic (I’m on here for betting reasons, so no offence meant). And I certainly do not want to light a touch paper.
However, I did encounter something I found very strange c. 18 months ago.
I was moving house and selling a few things which included a fairly new John Lewis mattress. I advertised on FB marketplace and the first person to respond clinched the sale. She sent a driver around with the cash to collect it.
I thought little more about it until 24 hours later she messaged me to say she wasn’t satisfied with the quality and wanted her money back. I was a bit taken aback (JLP aren’t usually rubbish) but I told her that was fine. Return the mattress and I’d refund her. Her reply was this:
’I am a Nigerian nurse who has come over here to work in your Health Service in response to your Government advertising in my country for people to come and help out in Britain. I have no money and I am doing you all a service so please give me the mattress for free.'
I was, and still am, on several levels astonished.
You obviously told her to get f@#ked?
I did.
For the benefit of Topping the startling part is obviously what she said. It’s sad that I have to spell it out, but for starters it wasn’t just her attitude: that somehow she had come to this country in order to help us out and was doing us a favour, that should mean freebies.
It was that the Government were recruiting Nigerian workers to make up for the (obvious) fact that others had left.
Where was this mentioned by the Leave campaign????
It was one personal encounter with what has clearly for many people become a serious issue: net migration.
And I’m a left-leaning person who loves multi-culturalism here. But there’s clearly a problem. We have totally fed Farage and us centrists ignore that at our grave peril.
You do realise we’ve been poaching labour for the NHS from commonwealth countries overseas since well before Brexit? They speak English, often have equivalent training, and will take the wages we offer. We recruit them because it takes a while to recruit and train them locally, so taking someone mid-career is an easy sugar fix. Zero link to Brexit.
Indeed, it’s been going on for decades.
Recruiting from overseas works in the short term to free up capacity, but long term we need more training places in the UK, and not have students in subjects like nursing getting into debt for a ‘degree’.
The BMA have until very recently been utterly opposed to more medical school places, preferring to encourage scarcity of doctors.
One of my pet ideas is to open a “British Hospital” somewhere like Mumbai or Manila, staffed at the top end by retired British doctors and managers doing it for a couple of years, and existing primarily to train up thousands of locals with UK-recognised qualifications that lead to visas. It also provides a service to the local population, and avoids taking mid-career professionals out of the country.
Medical school snootiness is a real issue. Doctors don’t need to be straight A students at A-level. They need good memories and a set of less academic competencies. However medical schools only favour the former.
One of my partner's daughter's best friends is...
Gold standard PB anecdote source.
My partner's daughter lives with us, and her friend is a regular visitor to our house. It's not that tenuous.
She is a first hand example of someone who gained a place at medical school despite having less than stellar A level grades. This is evidence that you don't actually need top grades to get into medical school in the UK, contradicting the claim made by the poster to whom I was responding.
Sigh….
I’m sure you’re telling the truth and your friend’s daughter found a way, but shall we inject some facts:
Page 12 - straight As required. But there are interviews and “broadening participation” stuff which probably helped her.
Overall though - straight As.
You are clearly unaware of the existence of A* grades.
Why do you say that? It’s not based on anything I have posted. My first post talks about “straight As” and the document I linked to has a minimum of…. all As.
If I had meant “all A*s I would have written it”…. I spend a lot of my life dealing with 18 year olds. I suspect far more than you do.
Two relevant bits of data:
Nationwide, about fifteen percent of A Level students end up with AAB or higher. That's not AAA, sure, but it's the one the government tracks and publishes. You can argue that there are some brilliant potential doctors outside that academic range, but I'm not sure. Even now, you have to assimilate a lot of information to do medicine well. (I know what students with a B or C in science look like.)
Also, there is something of a dirty secret among universities. It suits them to rack up entry grades- partly to reduce the number of applicants to a manageable level, and partly because of a Stella Artois "reassuringly selective" league table effect. If you can be really selective, that shows how good you are. So the published entry criteria don't always match what happens on results day. (I think the Office for Students have caught on to this and are looking to get data on the grades places actually accept.)
Bottom line is that the UK can have more medical students if it wants- but probably not a huge number more. But as a course which the government accepts it has to subsidise, that boils down to how many it is prepared to pay for.
Speaking to journalists on Friday, Rishi Sunak defended Biden: "From what I remember, he went to go and shake all their hands. As far as I’m aware, he went over to talk to some of the the parachutes jumpers to say thank you or hello”
Whomp whomp, Leon gets it wrong again. Trying to pretend that Biden has dementia just makes you look stupid.
Yeah, Biden is fine. You just gotta look at Biden and you know, wow, guy on top of his brief, never rambles in speeches, fit as a fiddle, could pass for 19, like a younger more virile JFK, also he's totally normal, I mean look at this
I genuinly don't understand PB lefties who pretend Biden is fine. Are they worried that if they admit the screamingly obviouS - Biden has serious cognitive decline - it somehow helps Trump? Do they think American media pundits scan PB looking for clues as to the health of their POTUS candidates, and if HorseBatteryWotsit says OK Biden is a senile old coot, then the election is lost?
FWIW I think Trump is ALSO showing major signs of losing it. He rambles much more, his walk and speech are hesitant, his jokes are way less funny. THEY ARE BOTH FAR TOO OLD FOR THE JOB
My mum is 86, and she displays all the traits that Biden does-stumbles, occasionally incoherent, chuckles for no reason, freezes during conversations, confusion. Sometimes she's razor sharp, other times batshit crazy. How anyone can say that Biden is fully able to function as president is as barmy as my mum is. The fella is too old, and Trump is just as bad, as well as being, well, Trump!
My mum is 83 and sharp as a tack. She still walks several miles a day. But she keeps herself going, as I’m sure Joe Biden does.
“We can negotiate a ceasefire tomorrow” (If Ukranian soldiers withdraw on current boundaries, and Ukraine says they’ll never join NATO)
“The G7 security agreements are ‘just pieces of paper’.” (They’re commitments to billions in military aid).
“Western ‘theft’ of Russian assets shows that ‘anyone’ could be next” (Anyone who invades another European country, maybe).
“I never planned to storm Kiev” (but the vehicles blown up in the original assault south from Chernobyl contained a load of military #1 uniforms and large Russian flags)
Green Party: We have a housing crisis! Voters: So you’ll build lots of houses? Green Party: If you elect us we’ll build even fewer houses. Voters: ?!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We must do something! Voters: So you’ll build lots of green power stations then? Green Party: We’re going to cancel nuclear, onshore wind is bad because ruins people’s views & we’re not going to build the power lines to enable offshore wind for the same reason. Oh, and solar is bad too. Voters: ??!!
Green Party: There’s a climate crisis! We will put a carbon tax on everything. Voters: So you’ll put up the tax on petrol / diesel then? Green Party: Our carbon tax will cut the tax on petrol & diesel. Vote for us! Voters: ?????
These people are not serious.
Do you have a link for those?
I wouldn't support Greens nationally, because their beliefs are too dogmatic for me - but some of that does not look like Green policy, perhaps more like a creative interpretation thereof.
Naturally you have to read between the lines a little. The carbon tax they quote works out at less than current taxes on petrol / diesel on the forecourt. The house building rate of < 150k / year is in there too. The power generation section contains the gems about cutting nuclear & the claim that they will provide for grid transfer via off-shore power cables. These are wildly more expensive, less efficient & less reliable than an on-shore long distance power grid. Why aren’t they just building out an on-shore power grid? Well, the manifesto doesn’t say, but it’s because their members apparently don’t like how overground power cables look. Spoils their nice views I believe.
The solar thing is from the reality that the “Greens” have opposed solar farms almost everywhere, and are apparently convinced that rooftop solar is the only valid solar. So instead of building out as much solar as possible, as fast as possible to avert a climate catastrophe they are in favour of slowly building out the most expensive form of solar power known to man. (Not that there’s anything wrong with rooftop solar: it’s great, but on-ground solar on the poorer grades of farmland outperforms it on every metric. Well, except whether nimbys like it I guess?)
The Greens have become even more nimbyish than any other party which, given that they keep banging on about the climate crisis at every opportunity, is the height of hypocrisy imo.
A FOAF is moving his family farm away from pure farming - the extensive outbuilding quadrangle is now a small business centre. He is going into solar farming in a big way - has sheep grazing under and around the panels. The sheep keep the grass mowed and the chap looking after the sheep keeps an eye on the state of things. His guesstimate is that the panels don't reduce the number of sheep you can have on the land, noticeably.
What's not to like?
Veering slightly off topic, I have often wondered whether for solar farms, the economics would add up of putting solar on turntables - and using some of the power generated to aim the solar panel at the sun. It feels like this would be more efficient - you would make more in energy than you would lose in powering the movement. But perhaps the capital costs would be unrealistic.
Hmmm. Just been forwarded a letter from the police about safety and security during the campaign. Terrorism threat level is SUBSTANTIAL apparently.
Not sure I need to worry about Terrorism. Just angry Nats, of which there are quite a few commenting on my FB adverts with "get out of my town" and "fuck off back to England" etc
One odd comment on our village FB group. The village hall has been bedecked by Saltaires. Some wag tried to complain that the hall should not be used for political propaganda. Erm, its the Fitba, and thats the flag. Not remotely political...
Following your posts, I had a little flutter on you winning your seat at 66/1. So, could you please:
1. Stop posting on here and get out campaigning. I don't imagine there are many PBers in your constituency. 2. Pretend you're Scottish for a few weeks.
If I'm tapping away on here its as a distraction from the endless client project meetings I am in. Campaigning being done digitally, and physically outside work time. Still have two more trips south before polling day.
From what I can see of the campaigns: SNP: Candidate and teams out practically full time LD: Limited doorknocking in selected pockets to dip for mood. Which feeds into digital campaigning specifically targeted on issues. Big spend increase this week with another next week. Last week campaign in plan Con: Has put up pictures of a doorknocking session. But a lot of him being away elsewhere. The visible campaign of David Duguid has essentially stopped. Haven't seen leaflets or social media Lab: Candidate having a great time walking various parts of Aberdeenshire some of which may be in the constituency albeit without actual voters RefUK: No clue
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
You do know that Clarkson's Farm is entertainment and not a factual documentary...
The council meetings were actual meetings, and the opposition to everything the local farmers were trying to do to make money, was very real. He’s running a real farm, and his neighbours are running real farms too, constantly worried about how they can avoid bankruptcy, which Clarkson can avoid because he’s got the cameras following him around.
Yes there’s going to be some dramatisation and some storylines, but the fact that farmers across the UK have hailed the show as brilliant tells you it’s a fair reflection of that industry. Many farmers see themselves as custodians of the land, much of which has been with families for many generations, and see it as a vocation as much as a job.
I've spoken to some of the councillors involved in the planning decisions, I know a couple of local farmers, and my kid used to go to the school in Clarkson's village.
There is no undercurrent of West Oxfordshire District Council being out to screw farmers, either in the current rainbow administration or the previous Conservative one (whose Local Plan is still in effect). There is no undercurrent of Chadlington villagers being M&S/Waitrose weenies - they have a real, long-established family-run butchers' shop which sells actual local meat, unlike Clarkson's shop which is 10% stuff grown on the farm and 90% branded stuff made elsewhere.
What happened is broadly (1) WODC said to Clarkson "there are a few difficult things in this application such as access and the AONB constraints, let's see if we can sit down and work through them with your planning consultant", (2) Clarkson said "no thanks", (3) the series was filmed with WODC as the pantomime villains and Clarkson as the put-upon hero.
I'm not going to disagree that the whole situation is unfortunate and that if backs hadn't been put up quite so much then it could all have been handled better, but to restate, it's entertainment and not a snapshot of what "Oxfordshire people... clearly think".
Fair enough, you’re a lot closer to it than I am. But what did the council think would happen, when they decided to let Clarkson’s cameras into a meeting where they were going to tell him to do one?
I honestly couldn't tell you! It seems a weird decision... maybe a well-intentioned one?
(The Conservative district councillor for Clarkson's ward stood down at the May elections with the stated reason that he'd had too much hassle and public oppobrium from the Diddly Squat planning issues. Instead, he did a (free-range) chicken run to the ward in Witney, where he actually lives. He came third behind a Green and a LibDem.)
Hmmm. Just been forwarded a letter from the police about safety and security during the campaign. Terrorism threat level is SUBSTANTIAL apparently.
Not sure I need to worry about Terrorism. Just angry Nats, of which there are quite a few commenting on my FB adverts with "get out of my town" and "fuck off back to England" etc
One odd comment on our village FB group. The village hall has been bedecked by Saltaires. Some wag tried to complain that the hall should not be used for political propaganda. Erm, its the Fitba, and thats the flag. Not remotely political...
Following your posts, I had a little flutter on you winning your seat at 66/1. So, could you please:
1. Stop posting on here and get out campaigning. I don't imagine there are many PBers in your constituency. 2. Pretend you're Scottish for a few weeks.
3. Don’t mention how you voted on Brexit. 4. Don’t mention the SLD’s full throated support for the GRR & Hate Crime bills. 5. Water ski across Portsoy harbour towed by a fishing boat.
Hmmm. Just been forwarded a letter from the police about safety and security during the campaign. Terrorism threat level is SUBSTANTIAL apparently.
Not sure I need to worry about Terrorism. Just angry Nats, of which there are quite a few commenting on my FB adverts with "get out of my town" and "fuck off back to England" etc
One odd comment on our village FB group. The village hall has been bedecked by Saltaires. Some wag tried to complain that the hall should not be used for political propaganda. Erm, its the Fitba, and thats the flag. Not remotely political...
Following your posts, I had a little flutter on you winning your seat at 66/1. So, could you please:
1. Stop posting on here and get out campaigning. I don't imagine there are many PBers in your constituency. 2. Pretend you're Scottish for a few weeks.
3. Don’t mention how you voted on Brexit. 4. Don’t mention the SLD’s full throated support for the GRR & Hate Crime bills. 5. Water ski across Portsoy harbour towed by a fishing boat.
Game’s a good ‘un.
6 Do a HALO jump from a A400m and land in the town square trailing a Union Jack Parachute. Plus points if you unzip your flight suit to reveal a white jacket and place a carnation in the lapel.
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
You do know that Clarkson's Farm is entertainment and not a factual documentary...
The council meetings were actual meetings, and the opposition to everything the local farmers were trying to do to make money, was very real. He’s running a real farm, and his neighbours are running real farms too, constantly worried about how they can avoid bankruptcy, which Clarkson can avoid because he’s got the cameras following him around.
Yes there’s going to be some dramatisation and some storylines, but the fact that farmers across the UK have hailed the show as brilliant tells you it’s a fair reflection of that industry. Many farmers see themselves as custodians of the land, much of which has been with families for many generations, and see it as a vocation as much as a job.
I've spoken to some of the councillors involved in the planning decisions, I know a couple of local farmers, and my kid used to go to the school in Clarkson's village.
There is no undercurrent of West Oxfordshire District Council being out to screw farmers, either in the current rainbow administration or the previous Conservative one (whose Local Plan is still in effect). There is no undercurrent of Chadlington villagers being M&S/Waitrose weenies - they have a real, long-established family-run butchers' shop which sells actual local meat, unlike Clarkson's shop which is 10% stuff grown on the farm and 90% branded stuff made elsewhere.
What happened is broadly (1) WODC said to Clarkson "there are a few difficult things in this application such as access and the AONB constraints, let's see if we can sit down and work through them with your planning consultant", (2) Clarkson said "no thanks", (3) the series was filmed with WODC as the pantomime villains and Clarkson as the put-upon hero.
I'm not going to disagree that the whole situation is unfortunate and that if backs hadn't been put up quite so much then it could all have been handled better, but to restate, it's entertainment and not a snapshot of what "Oxfordshire people... clearly think".
Fair enough, you’re a lot closer to it than I am. But what did the council think would happen, when they decided to let Clarkson’s cameras into a meeting where they were going to tell him to do one?
I honestly couldn't tell you! It seems a weird decision... maybe a well-intentioned one?
(The Conservative district councillor for Clarkson's ward stood down at the May elections with the stated reason that he'd had too much hassle and public oppobrium from the Diddly Squat planning issues. Instead, he did a (free-range) chicken run to the ward in Witney, where he actually lives. He came third behind a Green and a LibDem.)
Don't the accounts here rather over-simplify the politics?
Clarkson's wilful (and lying) characterisation of WODC started when it was an unchallenged, single-party, Tory fiefdom, with the ward where Diddly Squat is based (Churchill) represented by a generally absent Tory. Mostly, the local population were highly iffy about what Clarkson was up to - but Clarkson insisted in his pre-Amazon propaganda (his Sunday Times columns) that he was the victim of LibDem meddling (which would have been impressive, given how few LD councillors there were at the time). For some reason, Clarkson's never pointed out that he's not actually on the electoral register in Oxfordshire: doubtless, the point slipped his mind.
From an administrative point of view, of course, the problem's quite different from how Clarkson presents it. Pre-Amazon, his ideas were unpopular in the area because they made no attempt to deal with the traffic chaos likely to result. For all its uselessness on many things, the Tory-run WODC tried (legally and diligently) hard to reconcile Clarkson's commercial needs, local sentiment and planning law. None of those changed when the composition of WODC changed - and the LD-dominated Council generally maintained its predecessors' policies, as Amazon filmed what Clarkson previously wrote about.
Allowing that filming might make WODC look silly around the world. But it's quite popular locally, because it lets West Oxonians see what's being done in their name. And, given Clarkson's general local unpopularity, the majority of people in the ward support the council's actions under LD domination as much as they did under Tory control.
My understanding, BTW, is that Clarkson's Tory councillor was normally absent because he managed to lose his driving licence. So he connived at making himself incapable of visiting his ward (though he could walk to the District offices for Council meetings) - and never managed to get to the regular local parish council meetings.
Maybe if the Tory councillor had taken his role seriously. Maybe if the Tories had funded a decent bus service in rural Oxfordshire. Maybe if Clarkson, pre-Brexit, had explained to his ST readers the catastrophe his paymaster Rupert was advocating for farmers like Clarkson.
But Rupert's main interest in the Churchill ward at the time was securing the future of his Churchill-resident chum, Rebekah Brooks.
Clarkson’s Farm show was rather enlightening about the views of Oxfordshire people, and their elected representatives, regarding farming and farmers.
They clearly think that food just appears at M&S or Waitrose, and don’t like the idea that their lovely countryside views might be spoiled by the activity.
You do know that Clarkson's Farm is entertainment and not a factual documentary...
The council meetings were actual meetings, and the opposition to everything the local farmers were trying to do to make money, was very real. He’s running a real farm, and his neighbours are running real farms too, constantly worried about how they can avoid bankruptcy, which Clarkson can avoid because he’s got the cameras following him around.
Yes there’s going to be some dramatisation and some storylines, but the fact that farmers across the UK have hailed the show as brilliant tells you it’s a fair reflection of that industry. Many farmers see themselves as custodians of the land, much of which has been with families for many generations, and see it as a vocation as much as a job.
I've spoken to some of the councillors involved in the planning decisions, I know a couple of local farmers, and my kid used to go to the school in Clarkson's village.
There is no undercurrent of West Oxfordshire District Council being out to screw farmers, either in the current rainbow administration or the previous Conservative one (whose Local Plan is still in effect). There is no undercurrent of Chadlington villagers being M&S/Waitrose weenies - they have a real, long-established family-run butchers' shop which sells actual local meat, unlike Clarkson's shop which is 10% stuff grown on the farm and 90% branded stuff made elsewhere.
What happened is broadly (1) WODC said to Clarkson "there are a few difficult things in this application such as access and the AONB constraints, let's see if we can sit down and work through them with your planning consultant", (2) Clarkson said "no thanks", (3) the series was filmed with WODC as the pantomime villains and Clarkson as the put-upon hero.
I'm not going to disagree that the whole situation is unfortunate and that if backs hadn't been put up quite so much then it could all have been handled better, but to restate, it's entertainment and not a snapshot of what "Oxfordshire people... clearly think".
Fair enough, you’re a lot closer to it than I am. But what did the council think would happen, when they decided to let Clarkson’s cameras into a meeting where they were going to tell him to do one?
I honestly couldn't tell you! It seems a weird decision... maybe a well-intentioned one?
(The Conservative district councillor for Clarkson's ward stood down at the May elections with the stated reason that he'd had too much hassle and public oppobrium from the Diddly Squat planning issues. Instead, he did a (free-range) chicken run to the ward in Witney, where he actually lives. He came third behind a Green and a LibDem.)
Don't the accounts here rather over-simplify the politics?
Clarkson's wilful (and lying) characterisation of WODC started when it was an unchallenged, single-party, Tory fiefdom, with the ward where Diddly Squat is based (Churchill) represented by a generally absent Tory. Mostly, the local population were highly iffy about what Clarkson was up to - but Clarkson insisted in his pre-Amazon propaganda (his Sunday Times columns) that he was the victim of LibDem meddling (which would have been impressive, given how few LD councillors there were at the time). For some reason, Clarkson's never pointed out that he's not actually on the electoral register in Oxfordshire: doubtless, the point slipped his mind.
From an administrative point of view, of course, the problem's quite different from how Clarkson presents it. Pre-Amazon, his ideas were unpopular in the area because they made no attempt to deal with the traffic chaos likely to result. For all its uselessness on many things, the Tory-run WODC tried (legally and diligently) hard to reconcile Clarkson's commercial needs, local sentiment and planning law. None of those changed when the composition of WODC changed - and the LD-dominated Council generally maintained its predecessors' policies, as Amazon filmed what Clarkson previously wrote about.
Allowing that filming might make WODC look silly around the world. But it's quite popular locally, because it lets West Oxonians see what's being done in their name. And, given Clarkson's general local unpopularity, the majority of people in the ward support the council's actions under LD domination as much as they did under Tory control.
My understanding, BTW, is that Clarkson's Tory councillor was normally absent because he managed to lose his driving licence. So he connived at making himself incapable of visiting his ward (though he could walk to the District offices for Council meetings) - and never managed to get to the regular local parish council meetings.
Maybe if the Tory councillor had taken his role seriously. Maybe if the Tories had funded a decent bus service in rural Oxfordshire. Maybe if Clarkson, pre-Brexit, had explained to his ST readers the catastrophe his paymaster Rupert was advocating for farmers like Clarkson.
But Rupert's main interest in the Churchill ward at the time was securing the future of his Churchill-resident chum, Rebekah Brooks.
A good diatribe but miles away from reality when it comes to Clarkson and his views. In case you missed it he was vehementlly opposed to Brexit and stated it often and loudly in his columns.
Hmmm. Just been forwarded a letter from the police about safety and security during the campaign. Terrorism threat level is SUBSTANTIAL apparently.
Not sure I need to worry about Terrorism. Just angry Nats, of which there are quite a few commenting on my FB adverts with "get out of my town" and "fuck off back to England" etc
One odd comment on our village FB group. The village hall has been bedecked by Saltaires. Some wag tried to complain that the hall should not be used for political propaganda. Erm, its the Fitba, and thats the flag. Not remotely political...
Following your posts, I had a little flutter on you winning your seat at 66/1. So, could you please:
1. Stop posting on here and get out campaigning. I don't imagine there are many PBers in your constituency. 2. Pretend you're Scottish for a few weeks.
3. Don’t mention how you voted on Brexit. 4. Don’t mention the SLD’s full throated support for the GRR & Hate Crime bills. 5. Water ski across Portsoy harbour towed by a fishing boat.
Game’s a good ‘un.
6 Do a HALO jump from a A400m and land in the town square trailing a Union Jack Parachute. Plus points if you unzip your flight suit to reveal a white jacket and place a carnation in the lapel.
Far more seemly than my suggestion of where he places his carnation.
Comments
Interesting thing I hadn't factored into the planning - Sunday observance. Have been strongly advised not to go and canvass on a Sunday.
It wasn't a new poll in and of itself.
Sponsorship income equates to more than just overall ability.
But that doesn’t make local opposition to perfectly reasonable development any less insane. The world changes & we must change with it. Expecting farmers to preserve their land in aspic because local nimbys like the views is not reasonable.
Russia is certainly in a dilemma. Crimea is now almost as useless for basing aircraft as it is for surface vessels. The S-300 and S-400 systems are being knocked off as target practice by the Ukrainians. Hundreds of millions of dollars worth a time (although good luck getting any foreign power to pay that, Russia...). Meanwhile, tens of thousands of troops gloomily based there wait for the visiting HIMARS. They COULD be out helping the push towards Kharkiv - but that would leave Crimea open to an assault. Losing Crimea would be terminal to Putin. But keeping it is costing him too - the daily tally of manpower and material of lost under-resourced troops in the north and east is unsustainable.
Putin's strategy of going for broke in the expectation that Ukraine and its backers would have to fold has not worked. Forward momentum to take a village here, a field there has slowed to a snail's pace; they are now more likely to lose hundreds of men and the handful of vehicles they can scrape together to retake acreage they have recently relinquished, rather than make a push forwards. Meanwhile, scarce air defence is getting scarcer. Huge swathes of Russia have nothing to stop drones travelling 1,000 km or more to damage refining plants or manufacturing plant.
It is an absolute mess for Russia. Serves them right!
The media have a key roll to play in how it breaks. This morning the bbc radio news was very much saying “Farage has said he is the best alternative to Labour as they beat the Tories in a poll yesterday”. Now the story could equally have been “the Tories have said they are still the best chance to beat Labour after Reform came above them in one of four polls yesterday.
The first version is painting a picture that is a close up of a situation that changes the narrative massively compared to the zoomed out bigger picture of the second spin.
There are still a couple of weeks where the Reform manifesto could be “great” or be absolutely pulverised - it’s going to potentially be in the interests of Labour too to attack them soon. There is also the chance that a lot of skeletons can appear from Reform candidates cupboards (and of course other parties) which might have local push we don’t see on a national level.
So I reckon if Reform learn to campaign and get a leading personality who isn't as creepy as Farage then I can see a lot of these Labour gains going Reform in 2028/2029.
https://x.com/MattWallace888/status/1800770476756836431
I genuinly don't understand PB lefties who pretend Biden is fine. Are they worried that if they admit the screamingly obviouS - Biden has serious cognitive decline - it somehow helps Trump? Do they think American media pundits scan PB looking for clues as to the health of their POTUS candidates, and if HorseBatteryWotsit says OK Biden is a senile old coot, then the election is lost?
FWIW I think Trump is ALSO showing major signs of losing it. He rambles much more, his walk and speech are hesitant, his jokes are way less funny. THEY ARE BOTH FAR TOO OLD FOR THE JOB
There is no undercurrent of West Oxfordshire District Council being out to screw farmers, either in the current rainbow administration or the previous Conservative one (whose Local Plan is still in effect). There is no undercurrent of Chadlington villagers being M&S/Waitrose weenies - they have a real, long-established family-run butchers' shop which sells actual local meat, unlike Clarkson's shop which is 10% stuff grown on the farm and 90% branded stuff made elsewhere.
What happened is broadly (1) WODC said to Clarkson "there are a few difficult things in this application such as access and the AONB constraints, let's see if we can sit down and work through them with your planning consultant", (2) Clarkson said "no thanks", (3) the series was filmed with WODC as the pantomime villains and Clarkson as the put-upon hero.
I'm not going to disagree that the whole situation is unfortunate and that if backs hadn't been put up quite so much then it could all have been handled better, but to restate, it's entertainment and not a snapshot of what "Oxfordshire people... clearly think".
Is Biden doddery, yes. He’s old. Does he have dementia or not know what’s going on? Very little evidence of that.
I do enjoy people arguing though that the HoL mustn’t be aged capped whilst also saying Biden is too old to serve.
The reality is that the only person who can beat Trump is Biden. Nobody else can.
Whatever you say, what Biden has actually done is good. He’s been an objectively good President. The fact he’s smart enough to delegate big decisions shows more for his cognitive function than you would like to believe
So no, I am not embarrassed. I’d rather have somebody else but there is nobody else.
NEW THREAD
Ahead of the game tonight... 🏴
How anyone can say that Biden is fully able to function as president is as barmy as my mum is. The fella is too old, and Trump is just as bad, as well as being, well, Trump!
If I had meant “all A*s I would have written it”…. I spend a lot of my life dealing with 18 year olds. I suspect far more than you do.
It’s actually quite sad to watch.
Now they're cheap, it's not.
A Reform-Tory split of 19-18 might rapidly head towards 28-9.
One factor that might put a dampener on this, as Leon has reported, is that Farage himself is only standing in one seat, and most of the Reform candidates will likely be less appealing than the Tory candidates.
And then, of course, what is the true level of Reform support? YouGov have crossover, but Survation and More in Common still have a near 2:1 advantage for the Tories over Reform. (25-13 and 23-12, respectively)
That is an extraordinarily valuable thing and he is to be commended. No surprise that farmers adore him.
I hope ER will be more than a one hit wonder, but if she is....that's life. Who remembers anything or anyone else from 'Bob Massie's Test Match' in 1972.
The various Ukranian drones, from the cheap cardboard ones aimed at tanks, to much larger ones resembling light aircraft but without the man inside, have totally changed the direction of the war. The rest of the world can also learn from what Ukraine has achieved in only a couple of years, using hobby drones for reconnaissance and to spot for artillery, using them to carry grenades, and now using them to take out planes at airfields hundreds of miles away.
I’d like to think that, if I were Ukranian, I’d be a drone pilot. I know how to fly a plane, and understand the physics, but am too old and too unfit to go to the Top Gun school.
Thankfully, Western resolve to defeat Putin is still there, and it feels closer to the end in the last few days than it has in a long time.
But point taken on the subsamples.
Hope she’s invested some of her sponsorship millions, because she’s got a lot of life left to live.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/06/14/ukraine-russia-war-latest-news9/
“We can negotiate a ceasefire tomorrow” (If Ukranian soldiers withdraw on current boundaries, and Ukraine says they’ll never join NATO)
“The G7 security agreements are ‘just pieces of paper’.” (They’re commitments to billions in military aid).
“Western ‘theft’ of Russian assets shows that ‘anyone’ could be next” (Anyone who invades another European country, maybe).
“I never planned to storm Kiev” (but the vehicles blown up in the original assault south from Chernobyl contained a load of military #1 uniforms and large Russian flags)
He’s totally deranged.
Nationwide, about fifteen percent of A Level students end up with AAB or higher. That's not AAA, sure, but it's the one the government tracks and publishes. You can argue that there are some brilliant potential doctors outside that academic range, but I'm not sure. Even now, you have to assimilate a lot of information to do medicine well. (I know what students with a B or C in science look like.)
Also, there is something of a dirty secret among universities. It suits them to rack up entry grades- partly to reduce the number of applicants to a manageable level, and partly because of a Stella Artois "reassuringly selective" league table effect. If you can be really selective, that shows how good you are. So the published entry criteria don't always match what happens on results day. (I think the Office for Students have caught on to this and are looking to get data on the grades places actually accept.)
Bottom line is that the UK can have more medical students if it wants- but probably not a huge number more. But as a course which the government accepts it has to subsidise, that boils down to how many it is prepared to pay for.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odeillo_solar_furnace
The most incogrous one is the 1949 original experimental one nearby - I came acreoss it while walking round Vauban's historic fortifications and voila!
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a3/Four_solaire_Mont-Louis_France.JPG
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cxee3j31p1no
(The Conservative district councillor for Clarkson's ward stood down at the May elections with the stated reason that he'd had too much hassle and public oppobrium from the Diddly Squat planning issues. Instead, he did a (free-range) chicken run to the ward in Witney, where he actually lives. He came third behind a Green and a LibDem.)
4. Don’t mention the SLD’s full throated support for the GRR & Hate Crime bills.
5. Water ski across Portsoy harbour towed by a fishing boat.
Game’s a good ‘un.
Clarkson's wilful (and lying) characterisation of WODC started when it was an unchallenged, single-party, Tory fiefdom, with the ward where Diddly Squat is based (Churchill) represented by a generally absent Tory. Mostly, the local population were highly iffy about what Clarkson was up to - but Clarkson insisted in his pre-Amazon propaganda (his Sunday Times columns) that he was the victim of LibDem meddling (which would have been impressive, given how few LD councillors there were at the time). For some reason, Clarkson's never pointed out that he's not actually on the electoral register in Oxfordshire: doubtless, the point slipped his mind.
From an administrative point of view, of course, the problem's quite different from how Clarkson presents it. Pre-Amazon, his ideas were unpopular in the area because they made no attempt to deal with the traffic chaos likely to result. For all its uselessness on many things, the Tory-run WODC tried (legally and diligently) hard to reconcile Clarkson's commercial needs, local sentiment and planning law. None of those changed when the composition of WODC changed - and the LD-dominated Council generally maintained its predecessors' policies, as Amazon filmed what Clarkson previously wrote about.
Allowing that filming might make WODC look silly around the world. But it's quite popular locally, because it lets West Oxonians see what's being done in their name. And, given Clarkson's general local unpopularity, the majority of people in the ward support the council's actions under LD domination as much as they did under Tory control.
My understanding, BTW, is that Clarkson's Tory councillor was normally absent because he managed to lose his driving licence. So he connived at making himself incapable of visiting his ward (though he could walk to the District offices for Council meetings) - and never managed to get to the regular local parish council meetings.
Maybe if the Tory councillor had taken his role seriously. Maybe if the Tories had funded a decent bus service in rural Oxfordshire. Maybe if Clarkson, pre-Brexit, had explained to his ST readers the catastrophe his paymaster Rupert was advocating for farmers like Clarkson.
But Rupert's main interest in the Churchill ward at the time was securing the future of his Churchill-resident chum, Rebekah Brooks.