Could becoming a republic be the only way to keep Scotland in the Union? – politicalbetting.com

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sean_F said:

I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19

kle4 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

That also makes you a fucking wanker.

Indeed so. But a fucking wanker who is a good deal smarter than you

Can we have a citation or two in order to demonstrate your genius? You can't just claim world beating intellect when we have struggled on PB for years to find any prior evidence.

I am literally paid to go on free holidays to luxury hotels in beautiful sunny places

Yes, you are a paid sex tourist.

Nice work if you can get it?

Leon said:

dixiedean said:

Leon said:

Has anyone else got this stupid lurgy? Several of my friends have. And now me

It’s quite weird. In some ways it’s mild. No sore throat, no muscle aches. Not enough to keep you in bed (unless you want), but lots of sneezing and deep coughing and a definite yuk feeling and, worse, it really drags on

We all report similar symptoms

My mother has had it since the weekend.

I’ve just heard from ANOTHER friend

“Yeah let's see about after Xmas. I still feel shit. COld sort of gone but not quite from the chest or the head. Sneezy”

Exactly the same. Odd

pm215 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.

That is an appalling post.

Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.

I think it's pretty dubious of the EU to be putting loyalty clauses into their pension schemes in the first place, really. My employer doesn't get to yank back their contributions to my pension if I leave and go work for a competitor.

pm215 said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.

That is an appalling post.

Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.

I think it's pretty dubious of the EU to be putting loyalty clauses into their pension schemes in the first place, really. My employer doesn't get to yank back their contributions to my pension if I leave and go work for a competitor.

Cookie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sean_F said:

I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19

Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?

JosiasJessop said:

Malmesbury said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Sandpit said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

Dura_Ace said:

Leon said:

Pulpstar said:

JosiasJessop said:

Sandpit said:

Scott_xP said:

@sturdyAlex

And so it begins.

This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

Yes, the big fights next year are going to be if Trump can get his cost-cutting agenda past a Congress wholly owned and sponsored by the big donors and lobbyists.

The past couple of days have been an early example of what the next few months is going to bring. It’s going to be fascinating to watch (from a distance of many time zones!).

Who are Trump and Musk owned by? Other big donors, lobbyists, and foreign entities.

Trump maybe, Musk isn't. He's worth $447 Bn. Even if you take the value of say X down to zero he's still the richest man on the planet by a distance. ITAR regulations mean SpaceX is pretty much entirely American in fact and law.

Yeah, the idea Musk is “owned by lobbyists and foreign entities” is quite sensationally dumb even by the standards of PB’s resident mental tardigrade, @JosiasJessop

The reason so many - esp on the left - fear and loathe Musk is because he is extremely wealthy and powerful in his own right. Autonomous

Agree. He's completely beyond the law and democracy but is shaping the future of the US. That's why "they" are probably going to have to kill him,.

Possibly. It’s incredible how quickly we’ve memory holed the two sassytempts on Trump. One of which made him bleed and was 2cm from killing him

The fucking useless Ukrainians used Fiverr.

I’m glad you agree with my theory it was the Ukrainians. One day it will be revealed

It wasn’t the Ukranians. The Ukranian assassination attempts are successful, and they use bombs rather than guns.

But they have to be a tad more discreet taking out a US president in the USA

They wouldn’t use a 20-year-old idiot who couldn’t even make his own school’s shooting team, trying to take the shot from 100 yards away on the roof of the bulding the police were using as their base for the day; they’d have used a serious ex-military sniper from half a mile, out of sight of the USSS and likely to get away before they could find him.

No they wouldn’t. Think about it. If they used a pro and he got caught with links to Kyiv imagine the firestorm. All US aid would have ended instantly. And worse

They had to find a dumb clean skin incel who was so stupid he thought he’d survive the sassytempt, coz that hot blonde Eastern European girl in the bar persuaded him so

Jeez. It’s almost like you guys have never plotted thrillers

The Ukranian government would have to be insane and/or incompetent not to kill DJT if they had the chance. I mean, why wouldn't they? If they thought they could.

But of course. Who, overwhelmingly, has the money means men motivation and militaristic mindset to take out Trump? The Ukrainians

FFS the second sassytempt was some nutter who actually fought for Ukraine, even as they now urgently disown him

He didn’t. He tried to get involved, but was turned down as a useless nutter.

Leon doesn't let facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory. He thinks using 'facts' is something low-IQ people do...

JosiasJessop said:

kle4 said:

JosiasJessop said:

Leon said:

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

That also makes you a fucking wanker.

Indeed so. But a fucking wanker who is a good deal smarter than you

Can we have a citation or two in order to demonstrate your genius? You can't just claim world beating intellect when we have struggled on PB for years to find any prior evidence.

I am literally paid to go on free holidays to luxury hotels in beautiful sunny places

Yes, you are a paid sex tourist.

Nice work if you can get it?

Not really. It'd probably be a very soulless and empty lifestyle, at least from my perspective. Which might be why he tries to make his life out to be so brilliant; because it is actually so empty...

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sean_F said:

I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19

Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?

Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode

Mexicanpete said:

TOPPING said:

My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.

Buy a shit load, they can only go up in value as the developing Trump fiasco reminds voters of the error by they have just made.

OnlyLivingBoy said:

logical_song said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@sturdyAlex

And so it begins.

This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

The Trump-Musk falling out is going to be absolutely spectacular. Alien vs Predator level stuff. I have no doubt who will come out on top.

Ok, who?

Oh, Trump, easily.

TOPPING said:

Mexicanpete said:

TOPPING said:

My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.

Buy a shit load, they can only go up in value as the developing Trump fiasco reminds voters of the error by they have just made.

There were a lot of "you missed, bitch" t-shirts and stuff around also.

Mexicanpete said:

...

TOPPING said:

Mexicanpete said:

TOPPING said:

My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.

Buy a shit load, they can only go up in value as the developing Trump fiasco reminds voters of the error by they have just made.

There were a lot of "you missed, bitch" t-shirts and stuff around also.

Pride comes before a fall.

TOPPING said:

Mexicanpete said:

...

TOPPING said:

Mexicanpete said:

TOPPING said:

My picture quota. In a downtown NY store.

Buy a shit load, they can only go up in value as the developing Trump fiasco reminds voters of the error by they have just made.

There were a lot of "you missed, bitch" t-shirts and stuff around also.

Pride comes before a fall.

I mean we'll see won't we but this was surely the opposite. He was shot, fell down, then got up and won the presidential election.

Leon said:

Burgessian said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sean_F said:

I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19

Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?

Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode

That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.

I think there’s a 30% chance that Labour come THIRD at the next GE

Burgessian said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sean_F said:

I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19

Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?

Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode

That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.

TOPPING said:

Andy_JS said:

"Swedish rapper Gaboro was viciously shot to death in a car park last night in the city of Norrköping, according to Swedish outlet Expressen, just six months after award-winning masked rapper C.Gambino was shot dead in Sweden."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14213491/Moment-Swedish-gangster-rapper-shot-multiple-times-parking-lot-begs-life-filmed-gunman.html

"viciously shot to death"

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.

No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers

Well this is exactly the point. I must be missing something. I must be. There must be some benefit to Britain. I don't want to fall into the trap of the Remainers who reckon to be able to see literally no benefits whatsoever for Brexit.
Because I can't see any benefits whatsoever to Chagos, either to the British exchequer(who have to shell out to give Chagos away), or to western security (because valuable Indian Ocean territory goes to the Chinese) or to the environment (because thousands of square miles of protected ocean, including valuable coral reefs, quickly get given to the Chinese trawlers), or to Chagos islanders (who seem unimpressed).
But this must mean I am missing something. Because surely people don't take decisions with no upside whatsoever? Surely?

Mexicanpete said:

Leon said:

Burgessian said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Sean_F said:

I see Reform have just picked up another seat off Labour, in Kent.

It's easy to see the problems that Reform causes the Conservatives. But, they're causing problems to Labour, too.

The conservative gain in Dudley and Reform gain in Swale are terrible results for Labour

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1869902344852279350?t=d_aiDIWQXd8l4ZYtr59BTQ&s=19

https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1870058934007910636?t=C3Z6O15oCl3sOpCj9o3DMQ&s=19

Those are remarkable. Is that a 30% Lab-Ref swing in both cases?

Wow. They are incredible. This supports my thesis that the white working classes are going to switch en masse from labour to reform at the next GE. Labour will utterly implode

That is definitely an existential threat to Labour. Just look at how Boris managed to peel off those Red Wall seats. And Reform don't have the historic baggage the Tories carry with WWC voters.

I think a Tory/Reform coalition is likely. It makes sense for the Tories as it will be Reform who take the electoral hit as voters peel off disenchanted at the lack of free unicorns. Best chance of the duopoly reasserting itself in due course. The Tories really need to tempt Farage into government and I suspect his ego won't allow him to forego becoming Dep PM.

I think there’s a 30% chance that Labour come THIRD at the next GE

As it stands it's probably a great deal higher than 30%. I take it you are accounting for swingback.

Jonathan said:

Five years is a Long time. The right don’t seem to get that. Appear to be still in election mode and not thinking strategically.

Nobody knows what the next election will bring. Can see almost any outcome.

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.

No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers

Well this is exactly the point. I must be missing something. I must be. There must be some benefit to Britain. I don't want to fall into the trap of the Remainers who reckon to be able to see literally no benefits whatsoever for Brexit.
Because I can't see any benefits whatsoever to Chagos, either to the British exchequer(who have to shell out to give Chagos away), or to western security (because valuable Indian Ocean territory goes to the Chinese) or to the environment (because thousands of square miles of protected ocean, including valuable coral reefs, quickly get given to the Chinese trawlers), or to Chagos islanders (who seem unimpressed).
But this must mean I am missing something. Because surely people don't take decisions with no upside whatsoever? Surely?

The upside is that absurd human rights lawyers, and their ilk - eg Keir Starmer and Philippe Sands - get to feel good about “upholding international law”

That’s it

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.

That is an appalling post.

Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.

Leon said:

Jonathan said:

Five years is a Long time. The right don’t seem to get that. Appear to be still in election mode and not thinking strategically.

Nobody knows what the next election will bring. Can see almost any outcome.

Er, this is political betting. Our whole raison d’etre is making predictions, sometimes from absurdly long distances - geographical and temporal

Perhaps you’d be happier on nopoliticalbettingherethanks.com

RochdalePioneers said:

I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

Malmesbury said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.

No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers

Well this is exactly the point. I must be missing something. I must be. There must be some benefit to Britain. I don't want to fall into the trap of the Remainers who reckon to be able to see literally no benefits whatsoever for Brexit.
Because I can't see any benefits whatsoever to Chagos, either to the British exchequer(who have to shell out to give Chagos away), or to western security (because valuable Indian Ocean territory goes to the Chinese) or to the environment (because thousands of square miles of protected ocean, including valuable coral reefs, quickly get given to the Chinese trawlers), or to Chagos islanders (who seem unimpressed).
But this must mean I am missing something. Because surely people don't take decisions with no upside whatsoever? Surely?

The upside is that absurd human rights lawyers, and their ilk - eg Keir Starmer and Philippe Sands - get to feel good about “upholding international law”

That’s it

One thing that hasn’t got much mention is the lack of input of the Chagos Islanders into the matter.

The UN decolonisation thing has never been about democratic outcomes. It was established during the Cold War period, when democracy was a Western, Colonialist thing. In 1989 everyone discovered a love for pluralistic social democracy. But the old patterns remained. Note the rejection of the vote by the Falkland Islanders by the UN admin. as settling that issue.

The whole argument about handing the Chagos to Mauritius was based on a colonial administrative division.

In the modern world, it would be fairly simple to track down the Chagos Islanders and descendants who are directly concerned and setup a virtual democratic system where they could speak and vote on what they want.

MoonRabbit said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.

That is an appalling post.

Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.

Bottom line: these sort of appointments shouldn’t be massively controversial as this, the fact Starmer and his team can’t comprehend their mistake is rank bad shooting your own feet off politics.

Cookie said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.

No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers

Well this is exactly the point. I must be missing something. I must be. There must be some benefit to Britain. I don't want to fall into the trap of the Remainers who reckon to be able to see literally no benefits whatsoever for Brexit.
Because I can't see any benefits whatsoever to Chagos, either to the British exchequer(who have to shell out to give Chagos away), or to western security (because valuable Indian Ocean territory goes to the Chinese) or to the environment (because thousands of square miles of protected ocean, including valuable coral reefs, quickly get given to the Chinese trawlers), or to Chagos islanders (who seem unimpressed).
But this must mean I am missing something. Because surely people don't take decisions with no upside whatsoever? Surely?

DavidL said:

turbotubbs said:

I see the long arm of the law has finally come for those involved in the fights with police at Manchester Airport...

https://bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c627e37v21eo

A kick to the head of a person lying prone on the ground would normally be charged as an attempted murder on the basis that it is wickedly reckless and carries a foreseeable risk of a fatality.

Just saying.

williamglenn said:

MoonRabbit said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

Interesting old Telegraph story highlighted by a Guido commentor:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/4996440/Lord-Mandelson-must-remain-loyal-to-EU-to-guarantee-pension.html

It's only 30 thousand a year he gets, but it seems a pretty clear conflict of interest to me. He should relinquish the pension upon joining the British diplomatic service.

It's a bit of antisemitic trope or two to accuse a Jewish man of having split loyalties and is being influenced by money.

That is an appalling post.

Every member of the British diplomatic service should be above reproach, and the fact that the terms of Mandelson's pension explicitly state that he must remain loyal to an organisation that is not the British state and of which Britain is no longer a member is a clear conflict of interest. For what it's worth, I highly doubt Peter Mandelson is hugely fussed by £30,000 a year, which is why I suggest a good solution would be to relinquish the pension.

To keep schtum over this because of Peter Mandelson's Jewish heritage would not only be totally wrong, it would also not serve the interests of British Jews, because a double standard would be being applied that would end up placing members of that community in an invidious position.

Bottom line: these sort of appointments shouldn’t be massively controversial as this, the fact Starmer and his team can’t comprehend their mistake is rank bad shooting your own feet off politics.

Would someone with an instinctive feel for politics have given this answer?

https://x.com/paulembery/status/1870070383283482802

Still amazed that this video from last year, in which Starmer says he would choose Davos over Westminster, didn't get more traction. He was basically admitting that he prefers technocracy over democracy. It really was an astonishing statement.

RochdalePioneers said:

I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

TOPPING said:

Andy_JS said:

"Swedish rapper Gaboro was viciously shot to death in a car park last night in the city of Norrköping, according to Swedish outlet Expressen, just six months after award-winning masked rapper C.Gambino was shot dead in Sweden."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14213491/Moment-Swedish-gangster-rapper-shot-multiple-times-parking-lot-begs-life-filmed-gunman.html

"viciously shot to death"

Taz said:

numbertwelve said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.

Labour fail the Red Wall
The Tories fail the Red Wall

Voters turn to Reform

The political classes - The voters are at fault.

To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.

kle4 said:

bondegezou said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.

No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers

I try not to allow nascent nationalistic fervour colour my view here, but I've been a bit stumped what the perceived advantages fo that whole deal were supposed to be, particularly given how things have developed.

At a pragmatic, practical level (which is how every other country seems to be playing it) did we get gain anything useful?

Not that I disagree with the basic premise about weighing up options and taking heat out of politics generally.

The advantage of the deal is that we stop being in breach of international law.

But how much does that actually get us? That's a moral argument, and no one else in this matter seems to care about the moral position or the Chagossians, certainly not Mauritius or the UK. It doesn't appear to have gained us any goodwill with any party, so sure, no longer a breach, but given for all sides this seems to just be a transactional matter, I'm not particularly fussed on the moral position.

bondegezou said:

kle4 said:

bondegezou said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.

No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers

I try not to allow nascent nationalistic fervour colour my view here, but I've been a bit stumped what the perceived advantages fo that whole deal were supposed to be, particularly given how things have developed.

At a pragmatic, practical level (which is how every other country seems to be playing it) did we get gain anything useful?

Not that I disagree with the basic premise about weighing up options and taking heat out of politics generally.

The advantage of the deal is that we stop being in breach of international law.

But how much does that actually get us? That's a moral argument, and no one else in this matter seems to care about the moral position or the Chagossians, certainly not Mauritius or the UK. It doesn't appear to have gained us any goodwill with any party, so sure, no longer a breach, but given for all sides this seems to just be a transactional matter, I'm not particularly fussed on the moral position.

I think it’s a good thing to uphold international law. The international rules-based order since World War II has done a relatively good job at maintaining peace and security compared to the first half of the 20th century or to the 19th century. I don’t think we win under the Strong Man approach to global politics of Putin, Trump and Netanyahu.

It is also the case that upholding international law conspicuously helps in international relations. It is difficult to criticise other countries, e.g. Russia, Israel, for breaking international law if we’re also breaking it. Other countries do cite such matters.

RochdalePioneers said:

Taz said:

numbertwelve said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.

Labour fail the Red Wall
The Tories fail the Red Wall

Voters turn to Reform

The political classes - The voters are at fault.

To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.

Labour *don't know how* to level up.
The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.

numbertwelve said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Taz said:

numbertwelve said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.

Labour fail the Red Wall
The Tories fail the Red Wall

Voters turn to Reform

The political classes - The voters are at fault.

To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.

Labour *don't know how* to level up.
The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.

This is why Reform’s message is so hard to counter. When you distrust Labour/Tories so much, as a regular voter on the street who feels ignored, why wouldn’t you give them a go?

TOPPING said:

bondegezou said:

kle4 said:

bondegezou said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.

No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers

I try not to allow nascent nationalistic fervour colour my view here, but I've been a bit stumped what the perceived advantages fo that whole deal were supposed to be, particularly given how things have developed.

At a pragmatic, practical level (which is how every other country seems to be playing it) did we get gain anything useful?

Not that I disagree with the basic premise about weighing up options and taking heat out of politics generally.

The advantage of the deal is that we stop being in breach of international law.

But how much does that actually get us? That's a moral argument, and no one else in this matter seems to care about the moral position or the Chagossians, certainly not Mauritius or the UK. It doesn't appear to have gained us any goodwill with any party, so sure, no longer a breach, but given for all sides this seems to just be a transactional matter, I'm not particularly fussed on the moral position.

I think it’s a good thing to uphold international law. The international rules-based order since World War II has done a relatively good job at maintaining peace and security compared to the first half of the 20th century or to the 19th century. I don’t think we win under the Strong Man approach to global politics of Putin, Trump and Netanyahu.

It is also the case that upholding international law conspicuously helps in international relations. It is difficult to criticise other countries, e.g. Russia, Israel, for breaking international law if we’re also breaking it. Other countries do cite such matters.

There is no such thing as international law. It is just the set of rules most recently agreed upon by whoever were Top Nations at the time. As there is currently only one Top Nation it is that nation which makes the rules. Or breaks them.

There is, however, pragmatism, which every nation engages in.

TheScreamingEagles said:

BlancheLivermore said:

On Latin..

One thing that everyone should have to learn (preferably before they are legally allowed to utter it) is what etc means

Ecksetra makes me wince. And why is it always repeated? Ecksetra, ecksetra.. My second wince is almost a gurn

Et cetera means and the rest

And the rest and the rest

Who would say that?

The difference between exempli gratia and id est should be next on the list

No, everybody should learn Catullus 16.

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

That also makes you a fucking wanker.

Hardly breaking news.

Flaubert once said: Voyager rend modeste.

How wrong he was.

Well, we don't actually know what Leon was like before travel broadened his mind.

MoonRabbit said:

numbertwelve said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Taz said:

numbertwelve said:

RochdalePioneers said:

I've banged on about Reform and the red wall on and off for a while. The economy simply does not work for millions upon millions of voters. They find themselves stuck in dead towns surrounded by decay doing whatever work they can and never quite managing.

Labour have clearly failed them - hence the desperate vote for Brexit and then Boris. Hoping that something will change. The Tories made Big Promises and delivered nothing so have been eviscerated. The best weapon for said flaying was Labour, but as we've all touched on that vote is an ocean wide and a paddling pool deep.

Labour have joined the Tories on the naughty step, and it will be Reform who will benefit and benefit big.

Yup, exactly this and marries with my perception too.

Labour fail the Red Wall
The Tories fail the Red Wall

Voters turn to Reform

The political classes - The voters are at fault.

To address this the main parties need to accept their failings and reach out to these areas and try to genuinely level up or just accept it is managed decline.

Labour *don't know how* to level up.
The Tories have no interest in levelling up.

Reform will come in and offer simplistic bullshit which we may as well try say the voters as nothing else has worked.

This is why Reform’s message is so hard to counter. When you distrust Labour/Tories so much, as a regular voter on the street who feels ignored, why wouldn’t you give them a go?

Because the vast majority of voters aren’t as ignorant and stupid as you are making out. They know the difference between a slogan and an actual policy.

Reform vote will eventually be eaten up by the Conservatives, who are struggling to at moment as they shredded the parties long term vote winner for economic competence - but the process won’t be quick, and we’ll have to put up with several Labour governments before we get there.

Leon said:

TOPPING said:

bondegezou said:

kle4 said:

bondegezou said:

kle4 said:

Leon said:

Cookie said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

I know. I have some of that in me too but it's outweighed by the better bits. I think I've said before it wasn't Leavers v Remainers as distinct boundaried individuals because all Leavers have some Remain in them and all Remainers have some Leave. The vote was in essence a weighing up of these two sides of our national brain chemistry, our character if you like, and it was the less enlightened side which narrowly but clearly prevailed. This is how I see it anyway, the EU Referendum of 2016. It's a good way of looking at it because (i) it's true and (ii) it gets away from personal bitterness and division.

Agree (except obviously I'd say the more enlightened side won). Almost nobody wanted to tow the UK into the mid-Atlantic and shut up the barriers (metaphorically). Almost nobody wanted to bend over and hand the EU the vaseline. It was all a question of degree.
Most of politics can be seen this way. Everything is a balance of weighing up the options, everything is on a continuum. If you think something being done by government has no benefits whatsoever then you almost certainly haven't understood the issue properly. [Surely that is the case with Chagos?] Politics gets a lot less heated when you realise you are basically arguing over whether the amount of money the state spends should be 44% of GDP or 40% of GDP.

No. Chagos was a genuinely terrible decision made by seriously stupid people enabled by duplicitous anti-British wankers

I try not to allow nascent nationalistic fervour colour my view here, but I've been a bit stumped what the perceived advantages fo that whole deal were supposed to be, particularly given how things have developed.

At a pragmatic, practical level (which is how every other country seems to be playing it) did we get gain anything useful?

Not that I disagree with the basic premise about weighing up options and taking heat out of politics generally.

The advantage of the deal is that we stop being in breach of international law.

But how much does that actually get us? That's a moral argument, and no one else in this matter seems to care about the moral position or the Chagossians, certainly not Mauritius or the UK. It doesn't appear to have gained us any goodwill with any party, so sure, no longer a breach, but given for all sides this seems to just be a transactional matter, I'm not particularly fussed on the moral position.

I think it’s a good thing to uphold international law. The international rules-based order since World War II has done a relatively good job at maintaining peace and security compared to the first half of the 20th century or to the 19th century. I don’t think we win under the Strong Man approach to global politics of Putin, Trump and Netanyahu.

It is also the case that upholding international law conspicuously helps in international relations. It is difficult to criticise other countries, e.g. Russia, Israel, for breaking international law if we’re also breaking it. Other countries do cite such matters.

There is no such thing as international law. It is just the set of rules most recently agreed upon by whoever were Top Nations at the time. As there is currently only one Top Nation it is that nation which makes the rules. Or breaks them.

There is, however, pragmatism, which every nation engages in.

I know you've just come back wowed by America but the idea that America rules the roost as it did, is nuts

Go to East Asia (or indeed the Indian Ocean, or Africa, or Latin America) and you can feel the overwhelming power of China. Certainly equal to the USA

There was a NYT piece t'other day which made the point that China will soon have such a huge chunk of global manufacturing it will be akin to Britain at the early peak of the Industrial Revolution, or America at the end of WW2. Hegemonic

OnlyLivingBoy said:

logical_song said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Scott_xP said:

@sturdyAlex

And so it begins.

This had Trump's backing - actually, was dictated by him. Musk turned GOP Reps. against, forcing Trump into U-turn.

There were jokes in the chamber about "President Musk". Trump may try to style it out, but this is a direct challenge.

https://x.com/sturdyAlex/status/1870025547511681367

The Trump-Musk falling out is going to be absolutely spectacular. Alien vs Predator level stuff. I have no doubt who will come out on top.

Ok, who?

Oh, Trump, easily.

Mexicanpete said:

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

IanB2 said:

Nigelb said:

Leon said:

kinabalu said:

Leon said:

Interesting angle on Brexit

It was more damaging for the EU than the UK. The loss of UK pragmatism and liberalism has led directly to the EU’s self defeating regulatory bonanza, destroying innovation and crushing flexibility

https://www.eurointelligence.com/column/what-brexit-did-to-the-eu

I don't know about more damaging but certainly damaging, I thought as much at the time of the Referendum. My Remain vote was informed by this. Sort of person I am. Holistic. Big picture.

One reason I voted Leave WAS to damage the EU. Fucking wankers with their “rerun that referendum til you get the right result” ethos. They even tried it on us. I am deeply proud that in the end the British said “Nah, fuck off, we’re democratic, we will respect the result of our referendum, we’re not doing an EU re-run like everyone else, we’re better than them”

That also makes you a fucking wanker.

Hardly breaking news.

Flaubert once said: Voyager rend modeste.

How wrong he was.

Well, we don't actually know what Leon was like before travel broadened his mind.

Indeed, he only joined three or four years ago. We knew nothing of his opinions before that date.