How Betfair has reacted to the second round – politicalbetting.com
How Betfair has reacted to the second round – politicalbetting.com
My logic is most of Mel Stride’s support will go to Tugendhat and Cleverly which could put Badenoch out in the next round (which could happen if Stride’s supports splits evenly between Cleverly and Tugendhat).
Comments
-
First again, twice in 2 days
0 -
Second! Like Trumpy0
-
Can't fault your logic. So it's lay Badenoch then.0
-
Good to see Kemi going up.1
-
No odds for Harris or Trump?
0 -
People were saying yesterday that you need 45 votes to go through but isn't it 40? (assuming Richi continues not to vote)0
-
It's going to be Badenoch v Jenrick isn't it?
That one actually might be competitive with the members. The baseline is Badenoch will edge it but I'm not sure if conference/stump speeches don't pan-out.
Even Rishi ran Truss closer than expected in 2022.1 -
talking about manatees they are extraordinary (imo) in having no natural predators.
Seems bonkers but there it is, no natural predators - no great whites, bull sharks, killer whales, you name it. Don't predate the manatee.0 -
Are they vegan??TOPPING said:talking about manatees they are extraordinary (imo) in having no natural predators.
Seems bonkers but there it is, no natural predators - no great whites, bull sharks, killer whales, you name it. Don't predate the manatee.0 -
Badenoch needs to position herself as the stop Jenrick candidate to centrist MPs.1
-
YouGov have released a MRP for the US
https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/50489-yougov-first-mrp-estimates-of-the-2024-presidential-election
This is the first release of our model estimating 2024 presidential election votes in every state, based upon nearly 100,000 recent interviews of registered voters. We show Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by 50% to 47% just before their first debate. However, the race will be determined by who wins the most electoral votes, not popular votes, and, as it currently stands, the race is a toss-up.
We have Harris leading in 22 states and Washington D.C. with 256 electoral votes and Trump leading in 25 states with 235 electoral vote.
State Harris Trump Other MoE Number polled
Texas 46 51 3 ±2.7 6,899
Florida 46 52 2 ±2 7,726
Maine's 2nd District 47 50 3 ±3 266
Arizona 48 49 3 ±2.3 2,625
North Carolina 48 50 2 ±1.8 3,157
Georgia 49 49 2 ±2.4 2,957
Pennsylvania 49 48 3 ±1.8 4,858
Nebraska's 2nd District 50 49 1 ±3.1 196
Wisconsin 51 47 2 ±1.7 2,003
Nevada 51 47 3 ±3.5 1,158
Michigan 51 46 3 ±2.6 3,075
Minnesota 52 45 3 ±1.9 1,7825 -
I've just watched highlights of the debate and I don't understand how anyone would vote for Trump. He's deranged and clearly losing his marbles just in a different way to Biden. In 2016 this wasn't the case and you can really tell that 8 years on his age is starting to tell and the cognitive decline is well under way.12
-
They also hang out with some quite big alligators in the Florida springsTOPPING said:talking about manatees they are extraordinary (imo) in having no natural predators.
Seems bonkers but there it is, no natural predators - no great whites, bull sharks, killer whales, you name it. Don't predate the manatee.0 -
I remain completely disinterested in this race and whoever wins they will have a mountain to climb
However, Labour have made a political mistake over WFA and it was unnecessary
Apparently Reeves is looking at pension tax relief and reducing it to a flat 20%, and also restricting the cash amount able to be withdrawn to £100,000, would in this one measure raise 15-20 billion
Reeves could, and maybe should, have announced means testing of the WFA at the same time and argued that next years pension increase will be more than £300 that would be lost in November 25 thereby avoiding the furore that has accompanied the announcement2 -
JENRICK0
-
Some things transcend party politics.
https://x.com/alx/status/1833856702577271048
Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, JD Vance, Chuck Schumer and Michael Bloomberg at Ground Zero this morning on the anniversary of 9/114 -
On topic, this was my hot take yesterday on seeing the numbers. I suspect there will be a Stop Badenoch dynamic, implicit or explicit and this will upend her. That said, nobody is able to explain her appeal, so perhaps it should come as no surprise? She was a cowardly minister who achieved nothing, and spent much of her time ranting about trivial culture war issues.
We'll see.0 -
Seems believably tightNickyBreakspear said:YouGov have released a MRP for the US
https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/50489-yougov-first-mrp-estimates-of-the-2024-presidential-election
This is the first release of our model estimating 2024 presidential election votes in every state, based upon nearly 100,000 recent interviews of registered voters. We show Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by 50% to 47% just before their first debate. However, the race will be determined by who wins the most electoral votes, not popular votes, and, as it currently stands, the race is a toss-up.
We have Harris leading in 22 states and Washington D.C. with 256 electoral votes and Trump leading in 25 states with 235 electoral vote.
State Harris Trump Other MoE Number polled
Texas 46 51 3 ±2.7 6,899
Florida 46 52 2 ±2 7,726
Maine's 2nd District 47 50 3 ±3 266
Arizona 48 49 3 ±2.3 2,625
North Carolina 48 50 2 ±1.8 3,157
Georgia 49 49 2 ±2.4 2,957
Pennsylvania 49 48 3 ±1.8 4,858
Nebraska's 2nd District 50 49 1 ±3.1 196
Wisconsin 51 47 2 ±1.7 2,003
Nevada 51 47 3 ±3.5 1,158
Michigan 51 46 3 ±2.6 3,075
Minnesota 52 45 3 ±1.9 1,782
There are two in there I would be slightly sceptical of.
Firstly, I'm not sure I believe Harris is four points ahead in Nevada. I think that is probably the single most likely state to flip in the US, given its proximity to the border, and the midterm results.
Secondly, while I think the Arizona underlyings are probably right (or even understate Trump slightly), I think he will suffer from two factors. Firstly, the presence of Lake as the Senatorial candidate is not going to encourage moderate Republicans to trek to the polls (which would have almost certainly gifted Trump a couple of extra percent). Secondly, the abortion referendum there - if other states are a guide - is likely to motivate young people and women to go the polls. That's not great news for Trump there either. Without the referendum or Lake, I think Trump would have won Arizona comfortably. As it is, I would make Harris the narrow favourite.4 -
I simply cannot see Trump winning in any circumstancesMaxPB said:I've just watched highlights of the debate and I don't understand how anyone would vote for Trump. He's deranged and clearly losing his marbles just in a different way to Biden. In 2016 this wasn't the case and you can really tell that 8 years on his age is starting to tell and the cognitive decline is well under way.
I would say I have no idea how Harris will govern, but not being Trump is enough just as not being conservative was in July0 -
FWIW (not much) if you give Trump the tie in GA, the forced no Toss-Ups has Kamala winning with 275 ECVs (by my quick maths).NickyBreakspear said:YouGov have released a MRP for the US
https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/50489-yougov-first-mrp-estimates-of-the-2024-presidential-election
This is the first release of our model estimating 2024 presidential election votes in every state, based upon nearly 100,000 recent interviews of registered voters. We show Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by 50% to 47% just before their first debate. However, the race will be determined by who wins the most electoral votes, not popular votes, and, as it currently stands, the race is a toss-up.
We have Harris leading in 22 states and Washington D.C. with 256 electoral votes and Trump leading in 25 states with 235 electoral vote.
State Harris Trump Other MoE Number polled
Texas 46 51 3 ±2.7 6,899
Florida 46 52 2 ±2 7,726
Maine's 2nd District 47 50 3 ±3 266
Arizona 48 49 3 ±2.3 2,625
North Carolina 48 50 2 ±1.8 3,157
Georgia 49 49 2 ±2.4 2,957
Pennsylvania 49 48 3 ±1.8 4,858
Nebraska's 2nd District 50 49 1 ±3.1 196
Wisconsin 51 47 2 ±1.7 2,003
Nevada 51 47 3 ±3.5 1,158
Michigan 51 46 3 ±2.6 3,075
Minnesota 52 45 3 ±1.9 1,7820 -
Yes, this was the scary thing about last night – how weird and quite obviously bonkers he is. The fact that he could be Potus is terrifying: he is clinically insane, probably senile, and needs help.MaxPB said:I've just watched highlights of the debate and I don't understand how anyone would vote for Trump. He's deranged and clearly losing his marbles just in a different way to Biden. In 2016 this wasn't the case and you can really tell that 8 years on his age is starting to tell and the cognitive decline is well under way.
0 -
FPT:
Jon Stewart’s utter evisceration of a half-empty Congressional Committee, when talking about the 9/11 first responders and their treatment by the Federal government.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=_uYpDC3SRpM0 -
Can you stop with the repetitive one word posts.Anabobazina said:JENRICK
The spam trap is getting itchy.
First few times it might have been amusing, for the three hundred thousandth time, less so.12 -
IN THE INTERESTS OF BALANCE
I have to relate the following two observations today.
1) I had a haircut and the barber is a cash only establishment (and no it's not on St. James's; and
2) I walked past Sushi Dog which had a large notice in the window proclaiming they were "cashless".
I think we all know what that means.0 -
Sushi dog uses the hair clippings in their food?TOPPING said:IN THE INTERESTS OF BALANCE
I have to relate the following two observations today.
1) I had a haircut and the barber is a cash only establishment (and no it's not on St. James's; and
2) I walked past Sushi Dog which had a large notice in the window proclaiming they were "cashless".
I think we all know what that means.1 -
Haitian influx.TOPPING said:IN THE INTERESTS OF BALANCE
I have to relate the following two observations today.
1) I had a haircut and the barber is a cash only establishment (and no it's not on St. James's; and
2) I walked past Sushi Dog which had a large notice in the window proclaiming they were "cashless".
I think we all know what that means.0 -
I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn0 -
Is the spam trap an algorithm – or a human operator?TheScreamingEagles said:
Can you stop with the repetitive one word posts.Anabobazina said:JENRICK
The spam trap is getting itchy.
First few times it might have been amusing, for the three hundred thousandth time, less so.0 -
Means testing is precisely what she did announce. Not much she can do about the reams of nonsense being pumped out on social media.Big_G_NorthWales said:I remain completely disinterested in this race and whoever wins they will have a mountain to climb
However, Labour have made a political mistake over WFA and it was unnecessary
Apparently Reeves is looking at pension tax relief and reducing it to a flat 20%, and also restricting the cash amount able to be withdrawn to £100,000, would in this one measure raise 15-20 billion
Reeves could, and maybe should, have announced means testing of the WFA at the same time and argued that next years pension increase will be more than £300 that would be lost in November 25 thereby avoiding the furore that has accompanied the announcement
I don't think it's a mistake. They will have been hyper aware of the histrionics that accompany any change to pensioner benefits and taxation - these people spend all day on Facebook and the comments section of "West Midlands Live". Frankly, I would rip the plaster off and dump everything into this budget - roll NICs into income tax, abolish triple lock, social care reform, inheritance tax etc etc.1 -
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn0 -
A Hatian haircut sounds like one of the nastier punishments doled out by the Tonton Macoute.mercator said:
Haitian influx.TOPPING said:IN THE INTERESTS OF BALANCE
I have to relate the following two observations today.
1) I had a haircut and the barber is a cash only establishment (and no it's not on St. James's; and
2) I walked past Sushi Dog which had a large notice in the window proclaiming they were "cashless".
I think we all know what that means.2 -
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn0 -
Cashless not catless.mercator said:
Haitian influx.TOPPING said:IN THE INTERESTS OF BALANCE
I have to relate the following two observations today.
1) I had a haircut and the barber is a cash only establishment (and no it's not on St. James's; and
2) I walked past Sushi Dog which had a large notice in the window proclaiming they were "cashless".
I think we all know what that means.0 -
There was a decent enough distance between the two.rcs1000 said:
Sushi dog uses the hair clippings in their food?TOPPING said:IN THE INTERESTS OF BALANCE
I have to relate the following two observations today.
1) I had a haircut and the barber is a cash only establishment (and no it's not on St. James's; and
2) I walked past Sushi Dog which had a large notice in the window proclaiming they were "cashless".
I think we all know what that means.
I bloody love Sushi Dogs, that said.0 -
I would think the opposite. That she was a woman driven by faith.Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
I would really like to think that she was too sensible to be a believer but she did come from that time/caste which holds the CoE and its beliefs as very important.0 -
Algorithm.Anabobazina said:
Is the spam trap an algorithm – or a human operator?TheScreamingEagles said:
Can you stop with the repetitive one word posts.Anabobazina said:JENRICK
The spam trap is getting itchy.
First few times it might have been amusing, for the three hundred thousandth time, less so.0 -
Thank you for the warning. I shall tread carefully.TheScreamingEagles said:
Algorithm.Anabobazina said:
Is the spam trap an algorithm – or a human operator?TheScreamingEagles said:
Can you stop with the repetitive one word posts.Anabobazina said:JENRICK
The spam trap is getting itchy.
First few times it might have been amusing, for the three hundred thousandth time, less so.0 -
I really don't think it is. I can't see many Stride/Tugendhat/Cleverly votes switching to Jenrick/Badenoch. So my view is it's likely to be one from Jenrick/Badenoch against one from Cleverly/Tugendhat.Casino_Royale said:It's going to be Badenoch v Jenrick isn't it?
That one actually might be competitive with the members. The baseline is Badenoch will edge it but I'm not sure if conference/stump speeches don't pan-out.
Even Rishi ran Truss closer than expected in 2022.
I reckon 80% chance of Jenrick/Cleverly, 15% chance of Jenrick/Tugendhat, 5% chance of Badenoch against someone.
0 -
Thatch, I assume, not TRUSS?TOPPING said:
I would think the opposite. That she was a woman driven by faith.Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
I would really like to think that she was too sensible to be a believer but she did come from that time/caste which holds the CoE and its beliefs as very important.0 -
If you mean Thatch I thought she was a Methodist rather than CoE? Lots of that in Lincolnshire (Wesleys etc).TOPPING said:
I would think the opposite. That she was a woman driven by faith.Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
I would really like to think that she was too sensible to be a believer but she did come from that time/caste which holds the CoE and its beliefs as very important.
Truss certainly had faith in something, but I'm not sure it was anything to do with religion.2 -
How are you making these posts anyway? Vanilla always tells me the body of the post is too short...Anabobazina said:
Thank you for the warning. I shall tread carefully.TheScreamingEagles said:
Algorithm.Anabobazina said:
Is the spam trap an algorithm – or a human operator?TheScreamingEagles said:
Can you stop with the repetitive one word posts.Anabobazina said:JENRICK
The spam trap is getting itchy.
First few times it might have been amusing, for the three hundred thousandth time, less so.0 -
Thatch. But a truckload of Cons in any case. They just believe. It's weird.Anabobazina said:
Thatch, I assume, not TRUSS?TOPPING said:
I would think the opposite. That she was a woman driven by faith.Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
I would really like to think that she was too sensible to be a believer but she did come from that time/caste which holds the CoE and its beliefs as very important.1 -
The media was all over Biden's cognitive decline. Today there is an attempt at justification for Trump's bananas utterings. Take the Haitian immigrants eating dogs and cats nonsense. If Biden had suggested that, the white coats would be flapping, but the talking heads discussions are taking it seriously.MaxPB said:I've just watched highlights of the debate and I don't understand how anyone would vote for Trump. He's deranged and clearly losing his marbles just in a different way to Biden. In 2016 this wasn't the case and you can really tell that 8 years on his age is starting to tell and the cognitive decline is well under way.
The NYT is fact checking Harris, it sometimes concludes she has embellished reality. This is taken on a parity with Trump speaking absolute and utter fiction with no basis in fact.
Despite the madness and the improved economic statistics, the reality of lived lives over the last three and a half years will do for Harris. The fact Biden has been clearing up Trump excrement counts for nought. Blue collar Pennsylvanians believe they were better off under Trump.
But why are we surprised? You would all vote for Boris Johnson again given the opportunity.0 -
yes Fatch. Sorry anabob edited as I was replying and vanilla did its magic.Flatlander said:
If you mean Thatch I thought she was a Methodist rather than CoE? Lots of that in Lincolnshire (Wesleys etc).TOPPING said:
I would think the opposite. That she was a woman driven by faith.Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
I would really like to think that she was too sensible to be a believer but she did come from that time/caste which holds the CoE and its beliefs as very important.
Truss certainly had faith in something, but I'm not sure it was anything to do with religion.
Are there a lot of methodists in Lincs? No idea which flavour of divine being they support but presumably there still is one and it's still weird.0 -
Yes. They adore lettuce as a treat (albeit an exotic one).Sunil_Prasannan said:
Are they vegan??TOPPING said:talking about manatees they are extraordinary (imo) in having no natural predators.
Seems bonkers but there it is, no natural predators - no great whites, bull sharks, killer whales, you name it. Don't predate the manatee.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/16/us/florida-starving-manatee-feeding-program-trnd-scn/index.html
On the lack of predators - I do wonder about an evolutionary timescale, and wehther some now extinct predator used to dine on them. And that of course omits Homo sapiens.
However things like saltwater crocodiles do like to dine on juvenile dugongs if the occasion arises.0 -
I thought Thatcher was Methodist?Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn2 -
Bit of unfortunate date trivia for you: today, 9/11, is the national day of Catalonia. Their trade delegation is hosting a reception at Lincoln’s Inn. Didn’t clock when I got the invitation.
0 -
Or vocal about their decision to switch faiths.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn0 -
Yes, I think she was genuinely quite devout.Fysics_Teacher said:
I thought Thatcher was Methodist?Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn2 -
Many thanks to PB's Trump-Fluffers for their hillarious takes on the Harris-Trump debate!3
-
If the alternative were Trump? Absolutely.Mexicanpete said:
The media was all over Biden's cognitive decline. Today there is an attempt at justification for Trump's bananas utterings. Take the Haitian immigrants eating dogs and cats nonsense. If Biden had suggested that, the white coats would be flapping, but the talking heads discussions are taking it seriously.MaxPB said:I've just watched highlights of the debate and I don't understand how anyone would vote for Trump. He's deranged and clearly losing his marbles just in a different way to Biden. In 2016 this wasn't the case and you can really tell that 8 years on his age is starting to tell and the cognitive decline is well under way.
The NYT is fact checking Harris, it sometimes concludes she has embellished reality. This is taken on a parity with Trump speaking absolute and utter fiction with no basis in fact.
Despite the madness and the improved economic statistics, the reality of lived lives over the last three and a half years will do for Harris. The fact Biden has been clearing up Trump excrement counts for nought. Blue collar Pennsylvanians believe they were better off under Trump.
But why are we surprised? You would all vote for Boris Johnson again given the opportunity.0 -
Seriously: what Scot of a certain age could forget the Sermon on the Mound to the assembled Presbyterians of the (formerly official, somewhat and variously split and remerged) Church of Scotland?TOPPING said:
I would think the opposite. That she was a woman driven by faith.Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
I would really like to think that she was too sensible to be a believer but she did come from that time/caste which holds the CoE and its beliefs as very important.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sermon_on_the_Mound0 -
If I said “Wesleyan Methodist of the most bigoted and persecuting type” would anyone get the reference?TimS said:
Yes, I think she was genuinely quite devout.Fysics_Teacher said:
I thought Thatcher was Methodist?Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn0 -
I don't know about lots but the Methodists have their roots there.TOPPING said:
yes Fatch. Sorry anabob edited as I was replying and vanilla did its magic.Flatlander said:
If you mean Thatch I thought she was a Methodist rather than CoE? Lots of that in Lincolnshire (Wesleys etc).TOPPING said:
I would think the opposite. That she was a woman driven by faith.Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
I would really like to think that she was too sensible to be a believer but she did come from that time/caste which holds the CoE and its beliefs as very important.
Truss certainly had faith in something, but I'm not sure it was anything to do with religion.
Are there a lot of methodists in Lincs? No idea which flavour of divine being they support but presumably there still is one and it's still weird.
https://epwortholdrectory.org.uk/
Some of the locals weren't too keen on odd religious types so many left for the US (including on the Mayflower), so there are quite a few visitors from across the pond doing tours of Pilgrim sites.1 -
I have seen that Labour have again apparently refused to rule out scrapping the single person discount for Council Tax. This is going to make the WFA furore sound rather quaint, if they do this on top.3
-
Re: "proximity" of Nevada to Mexican border, it's about same distance from Henderson south of Las Vegas to Mexico, as from London to Durham in England.rcs1000 said:
Seems believably tightNickyBreakspear said:YouGov have released a MRP for the US
https://today.yougov.com/politics/articles/50489-yougov-first-mrp-estimates-of-the-2024-presidential-election
This is the first release of our model estimating 2024 presidential election votes in every state, based upon nearly 100,000 recent interviews of registered voters. We show Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by 50% to 47% just before their first debate. However, the race will be determined by who wins the most electoral votes, not popular votes, and, as it currently stands, the race is a toss-up.
We have Harris leading in 22 states and Washington D.C. with 256 electoral votes and Trump leading in 25 states with 235 electoral vote.
State Harris Trump Other MoE Number polled
Texas 46 51 3 ±2.7 6,899
Florida 46 52 2 ±2 7,726
Maine's 2nd District 47 50 3 ±3 266
Arizona 48 49 3 ±2.3 2,625
North Carolina 48 50 2 ±1.8 3,157
Georgia 49 49 2 ±2.4 2,957
Pennsylvania 49 48 3 ±1.8 4,858
Nebraska's 2nd District 50 49 1 ±3.1 196
Wisconsin 51 47 2 ±1.7 2,003
Nevada 51 47 3 ±3.5 1,158
Michigan 51 46 3 ±2.6 3,075
Minnesota 52 45 3 ±1.9 1,782
There are two in there I would be slightly sceptical of.
Firstly, I'm not sure I believe Harris is four points ahead in Nevada. I think that is probably the single most likely state to flip in the US, given its proximity to the border, and the midterm results.
Secondly, while I think the Arizona underlyings are probably right (or even understate Trump slightly), I think he will suffer from two factors. Firstly, the presence of Lake as the Senatorial candidate is not going to encourage moderate Republicans to trek to the polls (which would have almost certainly gifted Trump a couple of extra percent). Secondly, the abortion referendum there - if other states are a guide - is likely to motivate young people and women to go the polls. That's not great news for Trump there either. Without the referendum or Lake, I think Trump would have won Arizona comfortably. As it is, I would make Harris the narrow favourite.1 -
Methodist by upbringing and instinct, she converted to Anglicanism later in life.Fysics_Teacher said:
I thought Thatcher was Methodist?Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2015/07/22/god-and-mrs-thatcher
(The Co-Op as a threat to small shopkeepers thing hadn't occurred to me before... how times change.)2 -
FPT: First, the standard advice on North American bears: If it's black, fight back. If it's brown, lay down. And pretend to be dead.) If it's white, say good night.
And if it is a mother bear with one or more cubs, retreat slowly and cautiously.1 -
FPT: In parts of the US, coyotes help control feral cats. (Members of the Audubon Society probably approve, though they may not say so, openly.)0
-
Very interesting point. On the other hand, the Co-op arose precisely because of the problem of depending on small shopkeepers in an isolated village - or worse still a truck shop. It was very strong in the mining and industrial villages of Lothian right into the late C20 - I had to quote my gran's dividend number every tine I did an errand as a small child, and Mrs C still has her membership book.Stuartinromford said:
Methodist by upbringing and instinct, she converted to Anglicanism later in life.Fysics_Teacher said:
I thought Thatcher was Methodist?Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2015/07/22/god-and-mrs-thatcher
(The Co-Op as a threat to small shopkeepers thing hadn't occurred to me before... how times change.)3 -
FPT: Were I Elon Musk, I would not provoke Travis Kelce, Taylor Swift's boyfriend. He's a superb athlete -- and very large: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Travis_Kelce1
-
Contrary to what PB's quasi-resident Parapathetic Traveller fondly believes, bears most definitely ARE present throughout rural British Columbia, and indeed in exurban-to-suburban sections of the Lower Mainland AND the Okanagan Valley.Jim_Miller said:FPT: First, the standard advice on North American bears: If it's black, fight back. If it's brown, lay down. And pretend to be dead.) If it's white, say good night.
And if it is a mother bear with one or more cubs, retreat slowly and cautiously.
So heed Jim Miller's sage advice!0 -
Might as well get it done now and out of the way.numbertwelve said:I have seen that Labour have again apparently refused to rule out scrapping the single person discount for Council Tax. This is going to make the WFA furore sound rather quaint, if they do this on top.
If they are going to do it, of course.
Suspect they are floating this to see the reaction and they may just tweak it to an 20% discount or not go the whole way, or just for new households.0 -
How can the not see the poll tax comparison? Just toxic.Taz said:
Might as well get it done now and out of the way.numbertwelve said:I have seen that Labour have again apparently refused to rule out scrapping the single person discount for Council Tax. This is going to make the WFA furore sound rather quaint, if they do this on top.
If they are going to do it, of course.
Suspect they are floating this to see the reaction and they may just tweak it to an 20% discount or not go the whole way, or just for new households.0 -
It's that time of day when we offer up Telegraph headlines as full stories - today I offer you "Gang of wild otters mauls jogger" and "Self aware fish checks itself out in mirror before picking fight".
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/09/11/bluestreak-cleaner-wrasse-fish-awareness-body-osaka-japan/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2024/09/11/wild-otters-maul-jogger-harun-tanjung-aru-malaysia/0 -
Nah.Taz said:
Might as well get it done now and out of the way.numbertwelve said:I have seen that Labour have again apparently refused to rule out scrapping the single person discount for Council Tax. This is going to make the WFA furore sound rather quaint, if they do this on top.
If they are going to do it, of course.
Suspect they are floating this to see the reaction and they may just tweak it to an 20% discount or not go the whole way, or just for new households.
What they should do is make Council tax payable by each and every person in the property.0 -
32% of all dwellings are entitled to the discount. So it would raise about 8%, give or take. About £3bn. Numbers:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/603e0c208fa8f577cb88feee/Local_Authority_Council_Tax_base_England_2020_-_Statistical_Release_REVISED.pdf0 -
"Speaking as someone who is sick to death of the wall-to-wall news coverage of who Taylor Swift is dating, I would pay good money to watch Travis Kelce beat the shit out of Elon Musk."
https://x.com/Brian_KA/status/18338616083149460162 -
I think what that poster meant yesterday was that the winner is likely to get at least 45. It is pretty impossible for it to be 40 40 40. 38 should do it. Imagine it didn't- something like 43 39 38. That's what they meant.Sandpit said:
Yes, there’s 121 Tory MPs, so 40 gets you into the final if Sunak continues to abstain.Andy_JS said:People were saying yesterday that you need 45 votes to go through but isn't it 40? (assuming Richi continues not to vote)
0 -
From many previous threads: For some insight on pro-life thinking, let me recommend Nat Hentoff's "The Awful Privacy of Baby Doe". https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1985/01/the-awful-privacy-of-baby-doe/666190/
Briefly, a baby was born with Down's syndrome in Indiana. As sometimes happens with that syndrome, the baby was unable to feed normally. A simple operation could have fixed the problem, but the parents refused to have it done. At least one pro-life couple with a Downs sydrome child of their own, offered to adopt the baby. The parents refused that, too, and the baby was allowed to starve to death.
Nat Hentoff was a pro-life "Jewish atheist", who, before he became openly pro-life, was best known for his strong civil liberties positions, and his coverage of jazz. (I have one of his books, which has the wonderful title: "Free Speech for Me-- But Not for Thee".)1 -
And most of those 32% will be people less able to afford the loss of discount, 34% of private renters and 43% of social renters are in single person households...hardly broad shoulderscarnforth said:32% of all dwellings are entitled to the discount. So it would raise about 8%, give or take. About £3bn. Numbers:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/603e0c208fa8f577cb88feee/Local_Authority_Council_Tax_base_England_2020_-_Statistical_Release_REVISED.pdf1 -
https://x.com/ppollingnumbers/status/1833860225020948859
#New General Election poll
🔴 Trump 45%
🔵 Harris 45%
Last poll - 🔵 Harris +2
Economist #B - 1462 RV - 9/100 -
KTheScreamingEagles said:
Can you stop with the repetitive one word posts.Anabobazina said:JENRICK
The spam trap is getting itchy.
First few times it might have been amusing, for the three hundred thousandth time, less so.
E
M
I0 -
It has the air of another policy floated around with no intention of actually implementing it.Pagan2 said:
And most of those 32% will be people less able to afford the loss of discount, 34% of private renters and 43% of social renters are in single person households...hardly broad shoulderscarnforth said:32% of all dwellings are entitled to the discount. So it would raise about 8%, give or take. About £3bn. Numbers:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/603e0c208fa8f577cb88feee/Local_Authority_Council_Tax_base_England_2020_-_Statistical_Release_REVISED.pdf
There's something coming which could in theory be pre-mitigated, isn't there? Aside from leaving the country.0 -
How does restricting the cash amount to be withdrawn generate income, if at all?Big_G_NorthWales said:I remain completely disinterested in this race and whoever wins they will have a mountain to climb
However, Labour have made a political mistake over WFA and it was unnecessary
Apparently Reeves is looking at pension tax relief and reducing it to a flat 20%, and also restricting the cash amount able to be withdrawn to £100,000, would in this one measure raise 15-20 billion
Reeves could, and maybe should, have announced means testing of the WFA at the same time and argued that next years pension increase will be more than £300 that would be lost in November 25 thereby avoiding the furore that has accompanied the announcement
I can see that that will be a long-term increase in revenue (higher annuity from more still in the fund -> more annual taxes), but that does not seem to generate an immediate benefit.0 -
19% approve of government
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1833879500435677512?t=lFOqL2WqdJNpIVE0NLUCkA&s=190 -
Remove the discount for bands C upwards, or something similar.Pagan2 said:
And most of those 32% will be people less able to afford the loss of discount, 34% of private renters and 43% of social renters are in single person households...hardly broad shoulderscarnforth said:32% of all dwellings are entitled to the discount. So it would raise about 8%, give or take. About £3bn. Numbers:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/603e0c208fa8f577cb88feee/Local_Authority_Council_Tax_base_England_2020_-_Statistical_Release_REVISED.pdf0 -
..0
-
From previous previous thread and in answer to @Dura_Ace:Dura_Ace said:
Sorry for the delayed response. I had to wait for a new keyboard from Amazon as I smashed mine in a fit of rage.kjh said:@hyufd I was in your part of the world on Friday. On my trip to our Southwold house I popped into a place near Epping that sells replica Cobras and GT40s. Thought I had been to Epping in the dim and distant past, but I had no recollection.
@Dura_Ace will be lived I am looking at them. He has filled a quarry with Panthers to ensure I don't buy one of them. He now has to move onto Cobras. I would love a GT40 but realistically you can't take it to the pub.
So, let's get started.
FUCKING WHY?
Cobra replicas are inauthentic, ubiquitous and terrible cars made by depressed men in sheds from eclectic combinations of Jaguar bits and various antique V8s with the 298ci Rover V8 being the absolute nadir. The end result is invariably a shoddy and dangerous abomination that will leave you stranded on the side of the road with the inevitable over-heating (every single one of them runs hot, get proficient at gutting thermostats) or kill you in an uncommanded spin.
They are not even that cheap any more.
If you want open air thrills then get this.
https://www.autotrader.co.uk/car-details/202306198690098
It's got the S54 which is one of the best engines ever built. It's fast but won't kill you in a moment of inattention and you can get parts/repairs for it quite easily. This one needs a paint correction, new headlights and the interior's a bit tired but it's a good buy. You'd get it for 11 bags of sand with hard bargaining.
Sorry to have missed your delayed reply @Dura_Ace, also apologies to spelling pedants for not being able to spell livid.
The reason why is:
a) I really enjoy your replies
b) The noise. They sound lovely (If I ever buy one I won't buy one with a Rover engine, it will be a Ford or Chevy, but that also means I might die quicker)
c) The looks
You have to understand the reason for buying a Cobra, GT40 or Panther is not for the pleasure in driving it but for the reaction of others which is usually WTF is that? I could always go for a Panther DeVille, but I would be concerned you might have an aneurysm. I saw one for sale the other day.
You will be relieved to know most of my time is spent looking and not buying.
PS what you posted has gone. What was it?0 -
Doesn't really help the single person in sheltered accommodation which may be band D for stupid reasons - thinking of a block near us...TimS said:
Remove the discount for bands C upwards, or something similar.Pagan2 said:
And most of those 32% will be people less able to afford the loss of discount, 34% of private renters and 43% of social renters are in single person households...hardly broad shoulderscarnforth said:32% of all dwellings are entitled to the discount. So it would raise about 8%, give or take. About £3bn. Numbers:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/603e0c208fa8f577cb88feee/Local_Authority_Council_Tax_base_England_2020_-_Statistical_Release_REVISED.pdf0 -
Because up to 25% of the fund can be withdrawn tax-freeMattW said:
How does restricting the cash amount to be withdrawn generate income, if at all?Big_G_NorthWales said:I remain completely disinterested in this race and whoever wins they will have a mountain to climb
However, Labour have made a political mistake over WFA and it was unnecessary
Apparently Reeves is looking at pension tax relief and reducing it to a flat 20%, and also restricting the cash amount able to be withdrawn to £100,000, would in this one measure raise 15-20 billion
Reeves could, and maybe should, have announced means testing of the WFA at the same time and argued that next years pension increase will be more than £300 that would be lost in November 25 thereby avoiding the furore that has accompanied the announcement
I can see that that will be a long-term increase in revenue (higher annuity from more still in the fund -> more annual taxes), but that does not seem to generate an immediate benefit.1 -
Then you'd need another discount for oldies who didn't downsize, and by the time you've done all that it's little different from chopping the discount to 20% or putting it up by 5% for everyone.TimS said:
Remove the discount for bands C upwards, or something similar.Pagan2 said:
And most of those 32% will be people less able to afford the loss of discount, 34% of private renters and 43% of social renters are in single person households...hardly broad shoulderscarnforth said:32% of all dwellings are entitled to the discount. So it would raise about 8%, give or take. About £3bn. Numbers:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/603e0c208fa8f577cb88feee/Local_Authority_Council_Tax_base_England_2020_-_Statistical_Release_REVISED.pdf0 -
At a guess, 19% is about the number of public sector workers+trade unionists+benefit dependents+lawyers and other parasites.Big_G_NorthWales said:19% approve of government
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1833879500435677512?t=lFOqL2WqdJNpIVE0NLUCkA&s=19
Coincidence?
You decide ...0 -
They're already as unpopular as Boris at the height of partygate.Big_G_NorthWales said:19% approve of government
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1833879500435677512?t=lFOqL2WqdJNpIVE0NLUCkA&s=194 -
I don't really mind if it's Badenoch, Cleverly or Tugendhat. As long as it's not the slimefest Jenrick.Casino_Royale said:It's going to be Badenoch v Jenrick isn't it?
That one actually might be competitive with the members. The baseline is Badenoch will edge it but I'm not sure if conference/stump speeches don't pan-out.
Even Rishi ran Truss closer than expected in 2022.6 -
The Co-op still has 5 million members, and a part of sales goes to local charities if members scan their cards.Carnyx said:
Very interesting point. On the other hand, the Co-op arose precisely because of the problem of depending on small shopkeepers in an isolated village - or worse still a truck shop. It was very strong in the mining and industrial villages of Lothian right into the late C20 - I had to quote my gran's dividend number every tine I did an errand as a small child, and Mrs C still has her membership book.Stuartinromford said:
Methodist by upbringing and instinct, she converted to Anglicanism later in life.Fysics_Teacher said:
I thought Thatcher was Methodist?Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2015/07/22/god-and-mrs-thatcher
(The Co-Op as a threat to small shopkeepers thing hadn't occurred to me before... how times change.)
It's quite substantial - £138m since 2016, by this number:
https://www.coop.co.uk/communities
2 -
Shouldn’t policy be encouraging (strongly) oldies to downsize?carnforth said:
Then you'd need another discount for oldies who didn't downsize, and by the time you've done all that it's little different from chopping the discount to 20% or putting it up by 5% for everyone.TimS said:
Remove the discount for bands C upwards, or something similar.Pagan2 said:
And most of those 32% will be people less able to afford the loss of discount, 34% of private renters and 43% of social renters are in single person households...hardly broad shoulderscarnforth said:32% of all dwellings are entitled to the discount. So it would raise about 8%, give or take. About £3bn. Numbers:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/603e0c208fa8f577cb88feee/Local_Authority_Council_Tax_base_England_2020_-_Statistical_Release_REVISED.pdf0 -
NOT just feral cats, also unlucky house cats have also gotten et by coyotes, here in the wilds of north Seattle, within blocks of my humble abode.Jim_Miller said:FPT: In parts of the US, coyotes help control feral cats. (Members of the Audubon Society probably approve, though they may not say so, openly.)
0 -
So the extra tax generated is out of the income from the annuity purchase over the lifetime of the pensioner.JohnLilburne said:
Because up to 25% of the fund can be withdrawn tax-freeMattW said:
How does restricting the cash amount to be withdrawn generate income, if at all?Big_G_NorthWales said:I remain completely disinterested in this race and whoever wins they will have a mountain to climb
However, Labour have made a political mistake over WFA and it was unnecessary
Apparently Reeves is looking at pension tax relief and reducing it to a flat 20%, and also restricting the cash amount able to be withdrawn to £100,000, would in this one measure raise 15-20 billion
Reeves could, and maybe should, have announced means testing of the WFA at the same time and argued that next years pension increase will be more than £300 that would be lost in November 25 thereby avoiding the furore that has accompanied the announcement
I can see that that will be a long-term increase in revenue (higher annuity from more still in the fund -> more annual taxes), but that does not seem to generate an immediate benefit.0 -
I am surprised just how low it is and certainly the honeymoon is overFishing said:
At a guess, 19% is about the number of public sector workers+trade unionists+benefit dependents+lawyers and other parasites.Big_G_NorthWales said:19% approve of government
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1833879500435677512?t=lFOqL2WqdJNpIVE0NLUCkA&s=19
Coincidence?
You decide ...0 -
They badly need a good news story. Evidently being doomsters and gloomsters doesn’t make for high approval ratings, no matter how much they can blame the previous government.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am surprised just how low it is and certainly the honeymoon is overFishing said:
At a guess, 19% is about the number of public sector workers+trade unionists+benefit dependents+lawyers and other parasites.Big_G_NorthWales said:19% approve of government
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1833879500435677512?t=lFOqL2WqdJNpIVE0NLUCkA&s=19
Coincidence?
You decide ...
There have been a few smallish good news stories (the latest renewables auction for example, and resolving the junior doctors dispute) but they’ve seemed very unsurefooted about even those.
They need to smile a bit more.3 -
Except they will have changed a fundamental benefit of retirement and a lot of NHS consultants would be looking at immediate retirement.MattW said:
So the extra tax generated is out of the income from the annuity purchase over the lifetime of the pensioner.JohnLilburne said:
Because up to 25% of the fund can be withdrawn tax-freeMattW said:
How does restricting the cash amount to be withdrawn generate income, if at all?Big_G_NorthWales said:I remain completely disinterested in this race and whoever wins they will have a mountain to climb
However, Labour have made a political mistake over WFA and it was unnecessary
Apparently Reeves is looking at pension tax relief and reducing it to a flat 20%, and also restricting the cash amount able to be withdrawn to £100,000, would in this one measure raise 15-20 billion
Reeves could, and maybe should, have announced means testing of the WFA at the same time and argued that next years pension increase will be more than £300 that would be lost in November 25 thereby avoiding the furore that has accompanied the announcement
I can see that that will be a long-term increase in revenue (higher annuity from more still in the fund -> more annual taxes), but that does not seem to generate an immediate benefit.
Even as a flag to scare people it's a crap plan.0 -
Mrs Thatcher was certainly a believer.Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn0 -
The “good news” is this shows the electorate remains very far from the hyper-partisan, quasi-civil-warring blocs that characterise American democracy.williamglenn said:
They're already as unpopular as Boris at the height of partygate.Big_G_NorthWales said:19% approve of government
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1833879500435677512?t=lFOqL2WqdJNpIVE0NLUCkA&s=192 -
Well yes, but political acceptability is the topic...TimS said:
Shouldn’t policy be encouraging (strongly) oldies to downsize?carnforth said:
Then you'd need another discount for oldies who didn't downsize, and by the time you've done all that it's little different from chopping the discount to 20% or putting it up by 5% for everyone.TimS said:
Remove the discount for bands C upwards, or something similar.Pagan2 said:
And most of those 32% will be people less able to afford the loss of discount, 34% of private renters and 43% of social renters are in single person households...hardly broad shoulderscarnforth said:32% of all dwellings are entitled to the discount. So it would raise about 8%, give or take. About £3bn. Numbers:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/603e0c208fa8f577cb88feee/Local_Authority_Council_Tax_base_England_2020_-_Statistical_Release_REVISED.pdf0 -
She was brought up in a devout Methodist household, so I suspect that her true inclinations ran that way.TOPPING said:
I would think the opposite. That she was a woman driven by faith.Anabobazina said:
Oh indeed. I suppose I should have said main party leaders who are both explicitly atheistic. Boris is an atheistic but claimed to be religious from time to time. I doubt the likes of Thatch and TRUSS were particularly religious either.rcs1000 said:
I suspect that - through history - there are many people who have been quiet about their lack of faith.Anabobazina said:I don't think Cleverly has much of a chance (much is the shame, he's a decent guy and the best candidate). But, were he to lead the party, it would be – I think – the first time both main party leaders were atheists. I dare say @HYUFD and other political historians will verify?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/nov/01/james-cleverly-tory-mp-braintree-marijuana-online-porn
I would really like to think that she was too sensible to be a believer but she did come from that time/caste which holds the CoE and its beliefs as very important.0 -
The US electorate does not consist of UK centrist dads, so the UKCD take on Trump is not predictive of anything.Mexicanpete said:
The media was all over Biden's cognitive decline. Today there is an attempt at justification for Trump's bananas utterings. Take the Haitian immigrants eating dogs and cats nonsense. If Biden had suggested that, the white coats would be flapping, but the talking heads discussions are taking it seriously.MaxPB said:I've just watched highlights of the debate and I don't understand how anyone would vote for Trump. He's deranged and clearly losing his marbles just in a different way to Biden. In 2016 this wasn't the case and you can really tell that 8 years on his age is starting to tell and the cognitive decline is well under way.
The NYT is fact checking Harris, it sometimes concludes she has embellished reality. This is taken on a parity with Trump speaking absolute and utter fiction with no basis in fact.
Despite the madness and the improved economic statistics, the reality of lived lives over the last three and a half years will do for Harris. The fact Biden has been clearing up Trump excrement counts for nought. Blue collar Pennsylvanians believe they were better off under Trump.
But why are we surprised? You would all vote for Boris Johnson again given the opportunity.
Second and equally obvious point, most of the irritation with the palpably senile Biden was inspired by hatred of *Trump* and the desire for Biden to take himself out of the picture and let Harris do what she did last night. To defend Biden was to enable Trump.
Thirdly it is legitimate to consider the effects of Trump's utterances without thereby endorsing them, just as it is legitimate to study Mein Kampf. Trump is in some sense nuts and getting worse, but he is a long way from senile. The cat eating claim is batshit, but that is not the point. The point is, will it be believable to, and influence, people who are themselves batshit enough to even consider voting for Trump? And it might.
Not that any of this matters. Most things don't. It's less than two months since Trump was nearly assassinated. At the time this was claimed to be epoch making, now you had probably forgotten about it till I reminded you. This time next week the debate will be invisible in the rearview mirror. The election remains too close to call.2 -
That case was some decades ago.Jim_Miller said:From many previous threads: For some insight on pro-life thinking, let me recommend Nat Hentoff's "The Awful Privacy of Baby Doe". https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1985/01/the-awful-privacy-of-baby-doe/666190/
Briefly, a baby was born with Down's syndrome in Indiana. As sometimes happens with that syndrome, the baby was unable to feed normally. A simple operation could have fixed the problem, but the parents refused to have it done. At least one pro-life couple with a Downs sydrome child of their own, offered to adopt the baby. The parents refused that, too, and the baby was allowed to starve to death.
Nat Hentoff was a pro-life "Jewish atheist", who, before he became openly pro-life, was best known for his strong civil liberties positions, and his coverage of jazz. (I have one of his books, which has the wonderful title: "Free Speech for Me-- But Not for Thee".)
I don't know what the law is in the USA on treatment or withholding of treatment but in the UK there is not absolute authority for parents. They can be overruled by staff and courts if thought to not be acting in the child's best interests. Usually this makes the news when the parents want treatment that the staff and courts think will only bring needless suffering.
Deciding how much intervention is appropriate for severely handicapped neonates is a medical and ethical minefield0 -
Everytime a Labour Minister is interviewed it is 22 billion shortfall after 14 years of Tory rule and everything is terribleTimS said:
They badly need a good news story. Evidently being doomsters and gloomsters doesn’t make for high approval ratings, no matter how much they can blame the previous government.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I am surprised just how low it is and certainly the honeymoon is overFishing said:
At a guess, 19% is about the number of public sector workers+trade unionists+benefit dependents+lawyers and other parasites.Big_G_NorthWales said:19% approve of government
https://x.com/YouGov/status/1833879500435677512?t=lFOqL2WqdJNpIVE0NLUCkA&s=19
Coincidence?
You decide ...
There have been a few smallish good news stories (the latest renewables auction for example, and resolving the junior doctors dispute) but they’ve seemed very unsurefooted about even those.
They need to smile a bit more.
The country threw out the conservatives decisively in July and need hope and optimism, not constant doom and gloom
4
