Why are we talking about phone masts instead of, say, fare dodgers on the London Underground?
Because it’s easy to call out RP and BCH for their views and there isn’t much you can say about fare dodgers
I saw a few last week - without completely redesigning the barriers it’s going to be a hard issue to resolve because they are good at getting in and out of them
You are either for infrastructure or you aren’t. People pretend they are until it’s built near them and suddenly they are up in arms.
Despite all the economic boosts a new site will deliver, people can’t see the wood for the trees.
Build one on my roof. I’d love it.
You can have a modestly successful career in local politics by opposing the construction of absolutely everything by any means necessary. I should know, I've done it. I once got a standing ovation at a parish council by saying I would hang myself from a proposed 5G tower if it got built.
Subsequently, the vote in favour of building a 5G tower was carried, with only one dissenter.
Elections in Greenland tomorrow, will a strong focus on Trunp's declaration of his intent to "take over" the country, supposedly for the sake of US security. How long before the mini-Trump in Argentina applies the same logic to the Falkland Islands?
I highly doubt Milei will take much notice of the Falklands legislative assembly elections.
The UK also has a bigger military than Argentina and nukes, Greenland and Denmark have no nukes and a military a tiny fraction of the US' size
Why are we talking about phone masts instead of, say, fare dodgers on the London Underground?
Because it’s easy to call out RP and BCH for their views and there isn’t much you can say about fare dodgers
I saw a few last week - without completely redesigning the barriers it’s going to be a hard issue to resolve because they are good at getting in and out of them
A variation on my plan for Traffic Wardens?
That is, heavily armed and trained to have -
I've got the understanding of a four year old I've got the peace of mind of a killer's soul I've got the rationale of a New York cop I've got the patience of a chopping block
Elections in Greenland tomorrow, will a strong focus on Trunp's declaration of his intent to "take over" the country, supposedly for the sake of US security. How long before the mini-Trump in Argentina applies the same logic to the Falkland Islands?
I highly doubt Milei will take much notice of the Falklands legislative assembly elections.
The UK also has a bigger military than Argentina and nukes, Greenland and Denmark have no nukes and a military a tiny fraction of the US' size
Milei says that the Falklands stuff in Argentina is nonsense. And that the islanders have the last word.
Trump will NOT resume military aid to Ukraine until Zelensky leaves the presidency — BILD
Fucking outrageous. Americans should all hang their heads in shame. They need to atone for a generation at least for inflicting this traitorous moron upon the world.
It does reflect very poorly on 49% of Americans, who knowingly elected an evil man, simply in order to “own the Libtards.”
They voted to cut immigration, which Trump likely will do and to push back woke and EDI, which he is doing and to cut cost of living, which his tariffs likely won't do unless they increase production of US made goods.
'Owning the Libtards' was only a factor in relation to the first 2 above
It's all personal with Trump. Nothing to do with national interest, policy, strategy. Zelensky failed to debauch himself when Trump was after dirt on Biden, and this is payback.
Yeah, what a fuck up that was. I hope Ukraine thinks Hunter Biden was worth it.
It was to protect a great artist, so deffo worth it.
The paintings aren't absolutely terrible it has to be said. For a moment I thought the Billy Bunter character was HB's son - FFS, his dad's travails have made him grow up fast.
I am very busy at the moment, so can somebody write a thread comparing Mark Carney to The Earl of Home.
I don't recall that Harold Wilson - having seen off his Earlness - then got on the phone to Moscow to invite them to take us over as the next Soviet republic.
If Carney is Home, then the Canadian Tory is Wilson. And the Canadian Tories need to decide if they want to stay a sovereign nation or not - being strongly promoted by the guy who wants your country can't be good for electoral chances.
In fairness, that's not really the case. Polieviere has come out very strongly against Trump (slow off the mark, mind), but other Tories, most notably Doug Ford (the most powerful Tory, as PM of Ontario) was first up. And has just won re-election on that basis. Trump has been rude about Pierre, too. So it isn't true that the Tories are pro-Trump. However. All pro-Trumpists vote Tory.
Not really true, the MAGA party in Canada is Maxime Bernier's Peoples' Party of Canada not the Conservatives though they are only polling about 2%
Mark Carney being typically robust about trade with the US today. He points out that the entire Canadian surplus arises because America buys most of their subsidised oil and gas and perhaps they should be asking for the subsidy back.
But this does rather raise the question of why Canada thinks it is a good idea to subsidise its oil and gas production to the extent that it does. Is it the case that their production costs make it otherwise uncompetitive in international markets?
Elections in Greenland tomorrow, will a strong focus on Trunp's declaration of his intent to "take over" the country, supposedly for the sake of US security. How long before the mini-Trump in Argentina applies the same logic to the Falkland Islands?
I highly doubt Milei will take much notice of the Falklands legislative assembly elections.
The UK also has a bigger military than Argentina and nukes, Greenland and Denmark have no nukes and a military a tiny fraction of the US' size
What on earth has nukes to do with our ability to defend the Falklands
If Trump and Milei decide to take back the Falklands then there is nothing we can do about it militarily
Mark Carney being typically robust about trade with the US today. He points out that the entire Canadian surplus arises because America buys most of their subsidised oil and gas and perhaps they should be asking for the subsidy back.
But this does rather raise the question of why Canada thinks it is a good idea to subsidise its oil and gas production to the extent that it does. Is it the case that their production costs make it otherwise uncompetitive in international markets?
I didn't realise Canada had a whole bunch of tariffs on US goods (Dairy, steel, lumber amongst other stuff) that long predated Trump till this weekend tbh.
I am very busy at the moment, so can somebody write a thread comparing Mark Carney to The Earl of Home.
I don't recall that Harold Wilson - having seen off his Earlness - then got on the phone to Moscow to invite them to take us over as the next Soviet republic.
If Carney is Home, then the Canadian Tory is Wilson. And the Canadian Tories need to decide if they want to stay a sovereign nation or not - being strongly promoted by the guy who wants your country can't be good for electoral chances.
In fairness, that's not really the case. Polieviere has come out very strongly against Trump (slow off the mark, mind), but other Tories, most notably Doug Ford (the most powerful Tory, as PM of Ontario) was first up. And has just won re-election on that basis. Trump has been rude about Pierre, too. So it isn't true that the Tories are pro-Trump. However. All pro-Trumpists vote Tory.
Not really true, the MAGA party in Canada is Maxime Bernier's Peoples' Party of Canada not the Conservatives though they are only polling about 2%
Nope. There's a significant percentage of the 40% voting Tory who are traitorous. Latest poll had 15% of the population happy to be part of the USA. That means a hefty chunk of the Tories no matter what you claim.
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office if they held the balance of power with the LDs in a hung parliament).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
Mark Carney being typically robust about trade with the US today. He points out that the entire Canadian surplus arises because America buys most of their subsidised oil and gas and perhaps they should be asking for the subsidy back.
But this does rather raise the question of why Canada thinks it is a good idea to subsidise its oil and gas production to the extent that it does. Is it the case that their production costs make it otherwise uncompetitive in international markets?
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
I am very busy at the moment, so can somebody write a thread comparing Mark Carney to The Earl of Home.
I don't recall that Harold Wilson - having seen off his Earlness - then got on the phone to Moscow to invite them to take us over as the next Soviet republic.
If Carney is Home, then the Canadian Tory is Wilson. And the Canadian Tories need to decide if they want to stay a sovereign nation or not - being strongly promoted by the guy who wants your country can't be good for electoral chances.
In fairness, that's not really the case. Polieviere has come out very strongly against Trump (slow off the mark, mind), but other Tories, most notably Doug Ford (the most powerful Tory, as PM of Ontario) was first up. And has just won re-election on that basis. Trump has been rude about Pierre, too. So it isn't true that the Tories are pro-Trump. However. All pro-Trumpists vote Tory.
Not really true, the MAGA party in Canada is Maxime Bernier's Peoples' Party of Canada not the Conservatives though they are only polling about 2%
Nope. There's a significant percentage of the 40% voting Tory who are traitorous. Latest poll had 15% of the population happy to be part of the USA. That means a hefty chunk of the Tories no matter what you claim.
A significant minority of Tories maybe but NOT a majority unlike the PP and certainly your statement ALL Canadian Trumpites vote Tory was wrong as some of them vote PP.
If you look at only the ex Progressive Conservatives wing of the Conservative Party (who were the actual historical Tories) and ignore the ex Reform party wing the percentage of Tories backing Trump is even less
Elections in Greenland tomorrow, will a strong focus on Trunp's declaration of his intent to "take over" the country, supposedly for the sake of US security. How long before the mini-Trump in Argentina applies the same logic to the Falkland Islands?
The logic is entirely different, isn't it? Argentina don't apply a security argument in respect of the Falklands - it's largely based on geography and history (to be clear, I'm not supporting it, just saying that's the claim).
The claim also isn't new and didn't die with defeat in the Falklands War. Argentina has consistently claimed and continues to claim sovereignty, notwithstanding the fairly recent and decisive referendum.
I also think it unlikely Milei has any great interest in it. He's basically parked the issue, saying it's likely to take decades to resolve (i.e. "not really my problem").
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office if they held the balance of power with the LDs in a hung parliament).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
Mark Carney being typically robust about trade with the US today. He points out that the entire Canadian surplus arises because America buys most of their subsidised oil and gas and perhaps they should be asking for the subsidy back.
But this does rather raise the question of why Canada thinks it is a good idea to subsidise its oil and gas production to the extent that it does. Is it the case that their production costs make it otherwise uncompetitive in international markets?
I didn't realise Canada had a whole bunch of tariffs on US goods (Dairy, steel, lumber amongst other stuff) that long predated Trump till this weekend tbh.
Canada has a whole bunch of inter provincial tariffs too.
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
So it is a Scottish poll and is hugely relevant in the context of Westminster not least because Labour in Wales are also struggling
Also zero for Reform shows how sensible the Scots are
It isn't as whether a Labour or SNP MP is elected makes sod all difference in reality to whether Starmer stays in office as in the end both would back a Labour over Tory or Reform led government.
A Welsh only poll would be more significant as that would be more likely to show Reform and Tory gains from Labour than in Scotland
@Richard_Tyndall I don’t agree that planning works 99.9% of the time at least in the case of my area of expertise.
Hutchison 3G Ltd (“Three”) tried to do a large scale rollout and in many areas 80-90% of their applications were rejected. These are urban areas.
So no I don’t think it works well most of the time and I stand by that.
I’m open to accepting I am a minority on the rural landscape but in the urban environment frankly there shouldn’t be anything an MNO can’t build that isn’t PD.
Mark Carney being typically robust about trade with the US today. He points out that the entire Canadian surplus arises because America buys most of their subsidised oil and gas and perhaps they should be asking for the subsidy back.
But this does rather raise the question of why Canada thinks it is a good idea to subsidise its oil and gas production to the extent that it does. Is it the case that their production costs make it otherwise uncompetitive in international markets?
Depends what form those subsidies are in - tax allowances? Direct grants? It's tricky to measure, and the US has significant subsidies too; the UK has a 84% capital allowance etc etc
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
So it is a Scottish poll and is hugely relevant in the context of Westminster not least because Labour in Wales are also struggling
Also zero for Reform shows how sensible the Scots are
It isn't as whether a Labour or SNP MP is elected makes sod all difference in reality to whether Starmer stays in office as in the end both would back a Labour over Tory or Reform led government.
A Welsh only poll would be more significant as that would be more likely to show Reform and Tory gains from Labour than in Scotland
It makes a difference in the HOC to labour's seat total
Just because certain users are too thick to understand certain things. Shame really.
There are many users here who I disagree with but at least responded to my point in an intellectually intelligent way. It’s a shame a few rotten apples decided not to.
Elections in Greenland tomorrow, will a strong focus on Trunp's declaration of his intent to "take over" the country, supposedly for the sake of US security. How long before the mini-Trump in Argentina applies the same logic to the Falkland Islands?
I highly doubt Milei will take much notice of the Falklands legislative assembly elections.
The UK also has a bigger military than Argentina and nukes, Greenland and Denmark have no nukes and a military a tiny fraction of the US' size
What on earth has nukes to do with our ability to defend the Falklands
If Trump and Milei decide to take back the Falklands then there is nothing we can do about it militarily
Nukes are there to defend the UK and its overseas territories ultimately as a last resort.
Trump isn't going to go to war with the UK over the Falklands in any circumstance even if Milei did (and he has said he won't as it is a matter for Falkland Islanders and he is too busy slashing the size of the Argentine state)
Mark Carney being typically robust about trade with the US today. He points out that the entire Canadian surplus arises because America buys most of their subsidised oil and gas and perhaps they should be asking for the subsidy back.
But this does rather raise the question of why Canada thinks it is a good idea to subsidise its oil and gas production to the extent that it does. Is it the case that their production costs make it otherwise uncompetitive in international markets?
Depends what form those subsidies are in - tax allowances? Direct grants? It's tricky to measure, and the US has significant subsidies too; the UK has a 84% capital allowance etc etc
But the world is supposed to cutting such subsidies with a view to making fossil fuels less attractive. It doesn't look like Canada is trying very hard.
Of course, the fact that the vast weight of Canadian exports to the US are of raw materials once again demonstrates what a complete numpty Trump is. Why would putting tariffs on those be good for the US economy? It simply increases their costs and reduces the competitiveness of products made with those materials.
Just because certain users are too thick to understand certain things. Shame really.
There are many users here who I disagree with but at least responded to my point in an intellectually intelligent way. It’s a shame a few rotten apples decided not to.
We are rattled are we not
Calling fellow posters rotten apples because they have a different view or annoy you is your problem and you need to live with it
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office if they held the balance of power with the LDs in a hung parliament).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
Oh, so you don't think that Scottish-consistuency [edit] *MPs* count? You won't be worried if Scotland becomes independent then.
Not where the choice is Labour or SNP as in a hung parliament both would vote for a Labour led government anyway.
I remain committed to the Union but it is possible on current polls the next GE is a hung parliament where the Tories and Reform combined win a majority of seats in England and Wales but Labour and the LDs and SNP win a majority UK wide, so Scottish MPs would keep Starmer as PM
I am very busy at the moment, so can somebody write a thread comparing Mark Carney to The Earl of Home.
I don't recall that Harold Wilson - having seen off his Earlness - then got on the phone to Moscow to invite them to take us over as the next Soviet republic.
If Carney is Home, then the Canadian Tory is Wilson. And the Canadian Tories need to decide if they want to stay a sovereign nation or not - being strongly promoted by the guy who wants your country can't be good for electoral chances.
In fairness, that's not really the case. Polieviere has come out very strongly against Trump (slow off the mark, mind), but other Tories, most notably Doug Ford (the most powerful Tory, as PM of Ontario) was first up. And has just won re-election on that basis. Trump has been rude about Pierre, too. So it isn't true that the Tories are pro-Trump. However. All pro-Trumpists vote Tory.
Not really true, the MAGA party in Canada is Maxime Bernier's Peoples' Party of Canada not the Conservatives though they are only polling about 2%
Nope. There's a significant percentage of the 40% voting Tory who are traitorous. Latest poll had 15% of the population happy to be part of the USA. That means a hefty chunk of the Tories no matter what you claim.
The proportion who would support a US invasion is likely well below 40%.
Elections in Greenland tomorrow, will a strong focus on Trunp's declaration of his intent to "take over" the country, supposedly for the sake of US security. How long before the mini-Trump in Argentina applies the same logic to the Falkland Islands?
I highly doubt Milei will take much notice of the Falklands legislative assembly elections.
The UK also has a bigger military than Argentina and nukes, Greenland and Denmark have no nukes and a military a tiny fraction of the US' size
What on earth has nukes to do with our ability to defend the Falklands
If Trump and Milei decide to take back the Falklands then there is nothing we can do about it militarily
Nukes are there to defend the UK and its overseas territories ultimately as a last resort.
Trump isn't going to go to war with the UK over the Falklands in any circumstance even if Milei did (and he has said he won't as it is a matter for Falkland Islanders and he is too busy slashing the size of the Argentine state)
Do you really think we'd nuke Buenos Aires in response to an Argentine invasion of the Falklands, or that anyone would believe us if we said we would?
Elections in Greenland tomorrow, will a strong focus on Trunp's declaration of his intent to "take over" the country, supposedly for the sake of US security. How long before the mini-Trump in Argentina applies the same logic to the Falkland Islands?
I highly doubt Milei will take much notice of the Falklands legislative assembly elections.
The UK also has a bigger military than Argentina and nukes, Greenland and Denmark have no nukes and a military a tiny fraction of the US' size
What on earth has nukes to do with our ability to defend the Falklands
If Trump and Milei decide to take back the Falklands then there is nothing we can do about it militarily
Nukes are there to defend the UK and its overseas territories ultimately as a last resort.
Trump isn't going to go to war with the UK over the Falklands in any circumstance even if Milei did (and he has said he won't as it is a matter for Falkland Islanders and he is too busy slashing the size of the Argentine state)
Do you really think we'd nuke Buenos Aires in response to an Argentine invasion of the Falklands, or that anyone would believe us if we said we would?
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Elections in Greenland tomorrow, will a strong focus on Trunp's declaration of his intent to "take over" the country, supposedly for the sake of US security. How long before the mini-Trump in Argentina applies the same logic to the Falkland Islands?
I highly doubt Milei will take much notice of the Falklands legislative assembly elections.
The UK also has a bigger military than Argentina and nukes, Greenland and Denmark have no nukes and a military a tiny fraction of the US' size
What on earth has nukes to do with our ability to defend the Falklands
If Trump and Milei decide to take back the Falklands then there is nothing we can do about it militarily
Nukes are there to defend the UK and its overseas territories ultimately as a last resort.
Trump isn't going to go to war with the UK over the Falklands in any circumstance even if Milei did (and he has said he won't as it is a matter for Falkland Islanders and he is too busy slashing the size of the Argentine state)
Do you really think we'd nuke Buenos Aires in response to an Argentine invasion of the Falklands, or that anyone would believe us if we said we would?
Any sensible UK PM would not rule out the possibility to keep Argentina wary of invasion.
Had Ukraine kept its nukes in the 1990s Putin would certainly not have invaded and if Canada and Greenland came under the French and/or UK nuclear missile umbrella Trump would not be threatening them with annexation
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Our son who lives in Vancouver indicated that the east included Toronto and Quebec are liberals whereas the west of Canada are conservatives but nobody seems sure who will win the election now
With all the latest GPS communication devices, it seems difficult to understand how two boats could collide these days.
In the Channel, it has not been unknown for the coast guard to board ships not answering hails. To discover the ship is on automatic pilot and everyone on board is asleep.
With all the latest GPS communication devices, it seems difficult to understand how two boats could collide these days.
GPS tells you where you boat is - it doesn’t tell you where other boats are - and in fog it’s very likely that the sensors that could tell you that something is nearby won’t work.
Yesterday when driving home from Whitby we got fog driving through Saltburn and my car’s front assist alerted that it wasn’t able to work
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
You only describe the ex Reform party wing of the Conservatives, the Tories also include lots of red Tory ex Progressive Conservative party types like Jean Charest too. The Peoples' Party of Canada is more MAGA than the Conservatives are.
The NDP are the social democrat left of centre party ie the Canadian Labour Party (though they would be left of Starmer) and the BQ are basically the Canadian SNP
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
So it is a Scottish poll and is hugely relevant in the context of Westminster not least because Labour in Wales are also struggling
Also zero for Reform shows how sensible the Scots are
It isn't as whether a Labour or SNP MP is elected makes sod all difference in reality to whether Starmer stays in office as in the end both would back a Labour over Tory or Reform led government.
A Welsh only poll would be more significant as that would be more likely to show Reform and Tory gains from Labour than in Scotland
It makes a difference in the HOC to labour's seat total
Correction- it might make a difference, in four years' time, as one of our wise owls points out from time to time. And there are a lot of events still to come.
(FPTP is going to give some hair-trigger overreactions to small shifts in Scotland. It has been insanely unproportional for a while, and Reform's intervention will make that worse.)
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
You only describe the ex Reform party wing of the Tories, the Tories also include lots of red Tory ex Progressive Conservative party types like Jean Charest too. The Peoples' Party of Canada is more MAGA than the Conservatives are.
The NDP are the social democrat left of centre party ie the Canadian Labour Party (though they would be left of Starmer) and the BQ are basically the Canadian SNP
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Partly although it's in the context of if British politics had evolved without the rise of the Labour party. It's a bit like if the two party system here were Lib Dems and Conservatives with the NDP fulfilling the function of a small Labour party.
Mark Carney being typically robust about trade with the US today. He points out that the entire Canadian surplus arises because America buys most of their subsidised oil and gas and perhaps they should be asking for the subsidy back.
But this does rather raise the question of why Canada thinks it is a good idea to subsidise its oil and gas production to the extent that it does. Is it the case that their production costs make it otherwise uncompetitive in international markets?
Employing SAGD to produce oilsands in northern Albera when it is -30C doesn't come cheap.
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office if they held the balance of power with the LDs in a hung parliament).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
Oh, so you don't think that Scottish-consistuency [edit] *MPs* count? You won't be worried if Scotland becomes independent then.
Not where the choice is Labour or SNP as in a hung parliament both would vote for a Labour led government anyway.
I remain committed to the Union but it is possible on current polls the next GE is a hung parliament where the Tories and Reform combined win a majority of seats in England and Wales but Labour and the LDs and SNP win a majority UK wide, so Scottish MPs would keep Starmer as PM
It would be utterly kamikaze for the SNP to give succour to parties of the right- but they do have form (1979 and 2019) for doing so. The logic seems to be that the worse things look in Britain, the more attractive Sindy is.
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Partly although it's in the context of if British politics had evolved without the rise of the Labour party. It's a bit like if the two party system here were Lib Dems and Conservatives with the NDP fulfilling the function of a small Labour party.
The Canadian Conservatives though are a merger of their Conservatives and Reform, otherwise you are correct
BREAKING: Russia has accused the UK of being the "main instigator" of global conflict - and has appeared to blame the Second World War on Britain
I said here a looooong time ago that Russia's blaming of 'perfidious Albion' for everything was bad news, and left the way for Russia to actually get back into the USA's good graces and end up shafting us. Even though it has patently been us acting under US auspices, not the other way round.
UK leaders have been happy to make the most intemperate statements of all the major powers on 'Putin' (he doesn't get a first name, like 'Assad'), just like they've been happy to make the biggest environmental commitments on our behalf - because they want to show off to the room.
No the Russians have always been weirdly obsessed with the UK and ts supposed unlimited global reach. The Iranians have this too. I don't think it's down to anything we actually do, certainly not in the present or recent past.
In Iran, they have a saying:
"If you stub your toe on a rock, you can be sure an Englishman left it there."
And the standard way of blaming others for your misfortune is
"کار، کارِ انگلیسیهاست"
Which means "It’s the work of the English."
I've tried to explain to every Persian/Iranian that I meet that, it shouldn't be all English that are blamed: it should solely be @Leon, but they just look at me in a bemused manner.
Horse - you dislike Starlink. We get that. But so far you’ve made a series of strident statements which get rapidly demolished. Terrible latency? Nope. Can’t do meetings? Nope. Slower than 5G? Nope. Everyone is getting FTTP (Stop and Think about the practicalities of that one). Nope. Can’t work on a train. Nope.
Starlink may turn into a cul-de-sac technology. But here and now it offers genuinely fast and usable connectivity to people who literally have no other options. Where you insist the other options actually do exist and actually are faster and better actually.
I don’t work in the industry. You appear to do. Which means you know more that I do. But keep posting things that are demonstrably wrong in the real world because you’ve set your mind against it. Why is that? In my industry I start with the facts on the ground and build a narrative to explain them. Not decide on the narrative and be selective and manipulate of the “facts” to prove me right
Starlink's capabilities don't matter a jot if you are a non-MAGA government, or in a business which in any way competes with any of Musk's. Because you cannot rely on the service.
And I'd just say I find your constant hyping of Musk's products to be very much against what I thought were your values and morals.
How am I constantly hyping? Some products, yes. Partially. My latest Just Get A Tesla video slags off "FSD Capability" and describes it as "a con". Am I hyping FSD Capability? I'm saying that Tesla are being outrageous selling this thing which they know doesn't work. Is that me hyping them?
I've repeatedly poked a stick at autonomous vehicles - I fully expect they to get banned after the first nasty automation crash. I think the robot thing is absurd. I've attacked Neuralink.
What I don't do is adjust the facts to match what you insist should be "values and morals". Horse laid down a list of things that Starlink cannot do and was factually wrong. Stating that is neither hyping nor not hyping - it is what it is.
My morality is my morality. When I was younger and more strident I drank the cool-aid where my morality should be everyone's morality. I grew out of that long ago - and had to change party to best reflect that. What I think isn't necessarily what you think. Why do you think that what you think should be inviolate and adopted by others? If I want a lecture on morality I could go to church. Oh year, I stopped doing that as well...
What's the title of your channel again? Is it "Don't get a Tesla"?
No?
And my post commented on the technical merits of Starlink being pointless given the political shenanigans that Musk is performing with it.
And as for morality and values: wait until Musk and MAGA come after gay people. Or bisexuals. See my point now?
It's a car. It's not a man.
Starlink is a service. Should Starlink abruptly get switched off then I would have to revert back to shonky slow options. Are you saying that because of a theoretical event maybe in the future that shonky and slow is my best option now?
And MAGA are *already* going after anyone who isn't white Christian and straight. So what? Jenrick was foaming on about straight white Christians the other day. If I want to pay attention to homophobia I don't need to bother with MAGA.
What's your point? Which technologies / companies / political platforms are morally acceptable to you? I converted to Apple a couple of years ago - does that make me liable for the Uighurs too?
Don't Get a Tesla! There are plenty of other cars available.
and bollocks to people promoting Teslas on Youtube.
It's not really complicated. At all. You can twist yourself up in all kinds of mental bretzels and whataboutery so you don't feel so bad about yourself, but don't expect people on here not to call you out on it - and if you don't want anyone to lecture you on morality you're probably posting on the wrong forum!
Telling people to buy Teslas is fucking stupid unless you actively want the destruction of democracy and European liberal civilisation. Or maybe you just don't care enough about those things.
I can bat these away all day love.
"there are plenty of other cars available". Yep. As I say on the channel. Repeatedly. I'm not trying to tell people what to drive. Explicitly - I think they remain the best EV platform out there but I don't tell people who still drive a petrol car (like me) they are wrong or that people who get a car from another brand (like me) are wrong)
"bollocks to people promoting Teslas on YouTube" - ok. Up to you. Would it upset you to know that your view isn't the same as other people's views? But at least you aren't coming onto the channel by clicking to watch a video then by interacting with it by posting abuse, then engaging with me as I comment back. "How can you promote this" they say as by doing what they are doing they themselves are promoting it.
"whataboutery so you don't feel so bad about yourself". Don't worry, I'm not and I don't. The key learning from my 4 years as a town councillor with a political bully as Mayor is that you can't be bullied. I simply don't care what the other side think about me, so I'm not going to be annoyed or upset or cowed by them ranting.
Musk is an absolute dick. But some of the companies he used to be involved in before politics are doing some fantastic stuff. And that hasn't changed just because he's gone full dick crazy.
I have never seen your Youtube channel, and never will. It's enough to know it's called "Just Get a Tesla", combined with your misleading comments on here. Eg saying promoting Tesla isn't doesn't help Musk because "he's just the CEO and figurehead". I looked that one up too - Tesla makes up a massive chunk of Musk's total wealth.
I also wouldn't buy or promote a car from a company where Putin is the biggest shareholder, even if I thought the car itself was technologically OK, and even if I stood to make money from doing so.
And if I did promote such a car, I would fully expect to be condemned for it, even if philosophically "there are no moral absolutes"
Would you buy a Polestar? Genuine, non-attack question.
I don't know what Polestar is, but the internet suggests it's a Swedish subsidiary of a Chinese company.
I don't know enough about Polestar to say much, but in general I am not boycotting everything that has anything to do with China (nor everything that has anything to do with the US), but I am actively trying to buy European first where possible.
His wikipedia article is carefully anodyne, but he is a full on supporter of Xi and has er... ties to the Uyghur situation.
Geely is Li Shufu, and that means a direct tie to Xi and all that that entails.
But he isn't Musk, so there's definitely no moral issue. As I have had posted several times by people railing against Tesla!
And it isn't just Polestar. Lovely Swedish safe centrist dad Volvo Cars. Owned by Geely. Lotus. Owned by Geely. London Electric Vehicle Company. Owned by Geely.
You see that black cab you've just taken in London? You've just put money into the pockets of the guy who is a member of the equivalent of the Chinese parliament, literally writing policy proposals for Xi. You Bad Man you.
So paying money to a London Taxi driver who happens to have a London Taxi directly puts money into the hands of the Chinese Government.
Just wanting to make you 100% aware of how stupid your post above is
Its completely stupid. Deliberately. Because the "unless you sell your Tesla you're supporting the crushing of Ukraine" arguments which some people have posted are also stupid.
You know what pisses me off about you? Your constant dishonesty. Who has said "unless you sell your Tesla you're supporting the crushing of Ukraine"?
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Partly although it's in the context of if British politics had evolved without the rise of the Labour party. It's a bit like if the two party system here were Lib Dems and Conservatives with the NDP fulfilling the function of a small Labour party.
Yes, but with the Lib Dems as the establishment party, and the Cons as insurgents.
As if the Lib Dems were concentrated in the South East or South more broadly, and the Cons were concentrated in the North.
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
So it is a Scottish poll and is hugely relevant in the context of Westminster not least because Labour in Wales are also struggling
Also zero for Reform shows how sensible the Scots are
It isn't as whether a Labour or SNP MP is elected makes sod all difference in reality to whether Starmer stays in office as in the end both would back a Labour over Tory or Reform led government.
A Welsh only poll would be more significant as that would be more likely to show Reform and Tory gains from Labour than in Scotland
On this point we agree. Minimising Tory seats is all I care about in Scotland. Whether those non-Tory seats are Labour or SNP is a second-order consideration.
Horse - you dislike Starlink. We get that. But so far you’ve made a series of strident statements which get rapidly demolished. Terrible latency? Nope. Can’t do meetings? Nope. Slower than 5G? Nope. Everyone is getting FTTP (Stop and Think about the practicalities of that one). Nope. Can’t work on a train. Nope.
Starlink may turn into a cul-de-sac technology. But here and now it offers genuinely fast and usable connectivity to people who literally have no other options. Where you insist the other options actually do exist and actually are faster and better actually.
I don’t work in the industry. You appear to do. Which means you know more that I do. But keep posting things that are demonstrably wrong in the real world because you’ve set your mind against it. Why is that? In my industry I start with the facts on the ground and build a narrative to explain them. Not decide on the narrative and be selective and manipulate of the “facts” to prove me right
Starlink's capabilities don't matter a jot if you are a non-MAGA government, or in a business which in any way competes with any of Musk's. Because you cannot rely on the service.
And I'd just say I find your constant hyping of Musk's products to be very much against what I thought were your values and morals.
How am I constantly hyping? Some products, yes. Partially. My latest Just Get A Tesla video slags off "FSD Capability" and describes it as "a con". Am I hyping FSD Capability? I'm saying that Tesla are being outrageous selling this thing which they know doesn't work. Is that me hyping them?
I've repeatedly poked a stick at autonomous vehicles - I fully expect they to get banned after the first nasty automation crash. I think the robot thing is absurd. I've attacked Neuralink.
What I don't do is adjust the facts to match what you insist should be "values and morals". Horse laid down a list of things that Starlink cannot do and was factually wrong. Stating that is neither hyping nor not hyping - it is what it is.
My morality is my morality. When I was younger and more strident I drank the cool-aid where my morality should be everyone's morality. I grew out of that long ago - and had to change party to best reflect that. What I think isn't necessarily what you think. Why do you think that what you think should be inviolate and adopted by others? If I want a lecture on morality I could go to church. Oh year, I stopped doing that as well...
What's the title of your channel again? Is it "Don't get a Tesla"?
No?
And my post commented on the technical merits of Starlink being pointless given the political shenanigans that Musk is performing with it.
And as for morality and values: wait until Musk and MAGA come after gay people. Or bisexuals. See my point now?
It's a car. It's not a man.
Starlink is a service. Should Starlink abruptly get switched off then I would have to revert back to shonky slow options. Are you saying that because of a theoretical event maybe in the future that shonky and slow is my best option now?
And MAGA are *already* going after anyone who isn't white Christian and straight. So what? Jenrick was foaming on about straight white Christians the other day. If I want to pay attention to homophobia I don't need to bother with MAGA.
What's your point? Which technologies / companies / political platforms are morally acceptable to you? I converted to Apple a couple of years ago - does that make me liable for the Uighurs too?
Don't Get a Tesla! There are plenty of other cars available.
and bollocks to people promoting Teslas on Youtube.
It's not really complicated. At all. You can twist yourself up in all kinds of mental bretzels and whataboutery so you don't feel so bad about yourself, but don't expect people on here not to call you out on it - and if you don't want anyone to lecture you on morality you're probably posting on the wrong forum!
Telling people to buy Teslas is fucking stupid unless you actively want the destruction of democracy and European liberal civilisation. Or maybe you just don't care enough about those things.
I can bat these away all day love.
"there are plenty of other cars available". Yep. As I say on the channel. Repeatedly. I'm not trying to tell people what to drive. Explicitly - I think they remain the best EV platform out there but I don't tell people who still drive a petrol car (like me) they are wrong or that people who get a car from another brand (like me) are wrong)
"bollocks to people promoting Teslas on YouTube" - ok. Up to you. Would it upset you to know that your view isn't the same as other people's views? But at least you aren't coming onto the channel by clicking to watch a video then by interacting with it by posting abuse, then engaging with me as I comment back. "How can you promote this" they say as by doing what they are doing they themselves are promoting it.
"whataboutery so you don't feel so bad about yourself". Don't worry, I'm not and I don't. The key learning from my 4 years as a town councillor with a political bully as Mayor is that you can't be bullied. I simply don't care what the other side think about me, so I'm not going to be annoyed or upset or cowed by them ranting.
Musk is an absolute dick. But some of the companies he used to be involved in before politics are doing some fantastic stuff. And that hasn't changed just because he's gone full dick crazy.
I have never seen your Youtube channel, and never will. It's enough to know it's called "Just Get a Tesla", combined with your misleading comments on here. Eg saying promoting Tesla isn't doesn't help Musk because "he's just the CEO and figurehead". I looked that one up too - Tesla makes up a massive chunk of Musk's total wealth.
I also wouldn't buy or promote a car from a company where Putin is the biggest shareholder, even if I thought the car itself was technologically OK, and even if I stood to make money from doing so.
And if I did promote such a car, I would fully expect to be condemned for it, even if philosophically "there are no moral absolutes"
Would you buy a Polestar? Genuine, non-attack question.
I don't know what Polestar is, but the internet suggests it's a Swedish subsidiary of a Chinese company.
I don't know enough about Polestar to say much, but in general I am not boycotting everything that has anything to do with China (nor everything that has anything to do with the US), but I am actively trying to buy European first where possible.
His wikipedia article is carefully anodyne, but he is a full on supporter of Xi and has er... ties to the Uyghur situation.
Geely is Li Shufu, and that means a direct tie to Xi and all that that entails.
But he isn't Musk, so there's definitely no moral issue. As I have had posted several times by people railing against Tesla!
And it isn't just Polestar. Lovely Swedish safe centrist dad Volvo Cars. Owned by Geely. Lotus. Owned by Geely. London Electric Vehicle Company. Owned by Geely.
You see that black cab you've just taken in London? You've just put money into the pockets of the guy who is a member of the equivalent of the Chinese parliament, literally writing policy proposals for Xi. You Bad Man you.
So paying money to a London Taxi driver who happens to have a London Taxi directly puts money into the hands of the Chinese Government.
Just wanting to make you 100% aware of how stupid your post above is
Its completely stupid. Deliberately. Because the "unless you sell your Tesla you're supporting the crushing of Ukraine" arguments which some people have posted are also stupid.
You know what pisses me off about you? Your constant dishonesty. Who has said "unless you sell your Tesla you're supporting the crushing of Ukraine"?
+1 - I called RP out for being a hypocrite when he was preaching about morality and again for the stupidity of the post above.
Horse - you dislike Starlink. We get that. But so far you’ve made a series of strident statements which get rapidly demolished. Terrible latency? Nope. Can’t do meetings? Nope. Slower than 5G? Nope. Everyone is getting FTTP (Stop and Think about the practicalities of that one). Nope. Can’t work on a train. Nope.
Starlink may turn into a cul-de-sac technology. But here and now it offers genuinely fast and usable connectivity to people who literally have no other options. Where you insist the other options actually do exist and actually are faster and better actually.
I don’t work in the industry. You appear to do. Which means you know more that I do. But keep posting things that are demonstrably wrong in the real world because you’ve set your mind against it. Why is that? In my industry I start with the facts on the ground and build a narrative to explain them. Not decide on the narrative and be selective and manipulate of the “facts” to prove me right
Starlink's capabilities don't matter a jot if you are a non-MAGA government, or in a business which in any way competes with any of Musk's. Because you cannot rely on the service.
And I'd just say I find your constant hyping of Musk's products to be very much against what I thought were your values and morals.
How am I constantly hyping? Some products, yes. Partially. My latest Just Get A Tesla video slags off "FSD Capability" and describes it as "a con". Am I hyping FSD Capability? I'm saying that Tesla are being outrageous selling this thing which they know doesn't work. Is that me hyping them?
I've repeatedly poked a stick at autonomous vehicles - I fully expect they to get banned after the first nasty automation crash. I think the robot thing is absurd. I've attacked Neuralink.
What I don't do is adjust the facts to match what you insist should be "values and morals". Horse laid down a list of things that Starlink cannot do and was factually wrong. Stating that is neither hyping nor not hyping - it is what it is.
My morality is my morality. When I was younger and more strident I drank the cool-aid where my morality should be everyone's morality. I grew out of that long ago - and had to change party to best reflect that. What I think isn't necessarily what you think. Why do you think that what you think should be inviolate and adopted by others? If I want a lecture on morality I could go to church. Oh year, I stopped doing that as well...
What's the title of your channel again? Is it "Don't get a Tesla"?
No?
And my post commented on the technical merits of Starlink being pointless given the political shenanigans that Musk is performing with it.
And as for morality and values: wait until Musk and MAGA come after gay people. Or bisexuals. See my point now?
It's a car. It's not a man.
Starlink is a service. Should Starlink abruptly get switched off then I would have to revert back to shonky slow options. Are you saying that because of a theoretical event maybe in the future that shonky and slow is my best option now?
And MAGA are *already* going after anyone who isn't white Christian and straight. So what? Jenrick was foaming on about straight white Christians the other day. If I want to pay attention to homophobia I don't need to bother with MAGA.
What's your point? Which technologies / companies / political platforms are morally acceptable to you? I converted to Apple a couple of years ago - does that make me liable for the Uighurs too?
The car is giving the man much of his power. And he is using that power in ways that are, in my view, very bad. I'd hope that was your view as well. People promoting his brands are helping him. You are doing so - and I guess you're making a little money out of it.
And your comparison of Jenrick with what is going on in America is ludicrous and wrong.
My point was not about whether it is acceptable to *me*. My point - as I stated above - is that if you are a country or organisation that might annoy Musk for some reason, then any of his services are unreliable. That will be a major drag against the use of those services anywhere outside MAGAland.
We disagree but that is ok. Yes I'm promoting multiple Musk brands. Do you think Musk cares one way or another? The notion that a consumer boycott will sink him is for the birds - its having an impact on sales, but its not the collapse that some are hoping for. Anyone see the sales numbers in February here? Shows that the bigger drops in a few markets in Europe are not universal which means little impact - especially on a company whose bonkers share price is based on AI and automation hopium rather than reality.
As for Jenrick, he said that criminal justice was biased against "Christians" and "Straight White Men". We call out dog whistle racism when its MAGA doing it, but don't want to call it out when its the Tories? And you talk about morality?
This just makes my point. "Morality" talks of absolutes. Right and wrong. I've used that kind of language in the past which was wrong. With very very few exceptions there are no absolutes - only shades of grey. What we have here is one shade of grey addressing another shade of grey and saying "ha, you are grey"
Well the fact is you use cars and services that are provided by a company whose main shareholder has been discovered to be a facist loving ketamine addicted billionaire.
You also make videos (for which you earn money and seem to derive benefits from) that promote those products.
Now it’s up to you as to whether you continue to do so but given your previous posts I suspect an accurate description for you would be hypocrite
He's a kethead, without question.
Is he a fascist? Really? What's the evidence of it - and don't say the salute.
If you actually examine Musk's positions they are often at the opposite end of the spectrum from fascism. Musk is a free speech absolutist. That's an absurd position btw, but fascists don't want free speech, they want to stop free speech. Musk wants industry to be unencumbered by state regulation. Fascism shackles industry to deliver what the state wants. Musk thinks there's lots of penpusher bureaucrats and whole departments that can be done away with. Fascism regulates every aspect of life to the nth degree. Musk wants more migration. MAGA and especially some of the far right parties he has hyped want zero or negative migration.
"Musk is a fascist" doesn't hold up to basic scrutiny once you drop the emotional response and actually look at it.
He's retweeted far-right accounts promoting civil war in the UK. He was reintrointruced to Trump's canpaign by Peter Thiel, an open techno-fascist, who is the kingmaker, and also promoted fascist ideologues like Curtis Yarvin to Vance.
He was named by his father after a character in a Nazi rocket scientists novel about a benign dictator who took over Mars. I would say the signs are pretty clear.
He has been ramping Yaxley-Lennon which made me very angry. But he isn't ramping it because he supports that mindset. SYL wants to remove migrants. Musk is in America saying that migration is a good thing (which enrages many MAGA activists).
So basically your argument is he is ramping right wing people for the lols not because he agrees with their viewpoint.
While mine is that Trump is posting those item because he does agree with their viewpoint
My argument is that he is ramping people who he thinks have been censored - SYL, AfD etc etc. It's bloody stupid, but it isn't fascism.
Do you think he gave Nazi salutes?
No, though I have been hugely entertained by the various side by side video clips. We don't even need to pull apart the mechanics of the salute and the very odd angle he was pulling vs the ramrod straight execution of the nazis doing it.
The proof that so many people offer for Musk being a fascist is those salutes. You yourself appear to have fallen back onto them as the last redoubt of an argument that falls apart under scrutiny.
Go back to my list of Musk vs Fascism positions. Discuss those point by point - those are relevant and would be whether or not a toddler moron has bounced around a stage like a 5 year old doung dodgy salutes, thumping the dias in excitement and doing absurd flag planting gestures complete with sounds.
"But he did a salute". Yeah. Harry dressed up as one. Cosplaying fascism doesn't make you actually fascist.
Interestingly I think Musk is a fascist - or maybe proro-fascist is a better description given he hasn't really got going yet. But I think the salute is entirely irrelevant and misleading. Far more important are Algakirk's list of 14 indicators, most of which I think Trump and Musk are ticking to a greater or lesser degree.
So the salute argument is pointless and ultimately wrong. You can find lots of examples of people we know are not fascists doing similar salutes and of course there are plenty of examples of people who we would happily class as fascists who have never been photographed making salutes. So it is rather daft to concentrate on this one irrelevant action.
I haven't seen a lot of videos ('photographed' is meaningless, of course people sometimes have an arm raised) of "people we know are not fascists doing similar salutes". What do you have in mind?
Of course the interpretation depends partly on the context, and on the views that the person is known to be promoting. But Musk clearly performed fascist-style salutes at that rally. Maybe he was so off his head that he didn't have a clue what he was doing, and accidentally did them while not in control of his arms or something, but I find that a bit far-fetched.
If you are basing it off the video then I think if a Nazi in Germany in the 1930s had given the Nazi salute in that manner they would probably have been shot for taking the piss.
Which is why I said it wasn't a Hitlergruß, but clearly a fascist-style salute.
Though Germans mostly did see it as a Hitlergruß, which may not be unconnected to the 80% fall in Tesla sales in Germany in February.
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Partly although it's in the context of if British politics had evolved without the rise of the Labour party. It's a bit like if the two party system here were Lib Dems and Conservatives with the NDP fulfilling the function of a small Labour party.
Yes, but with the Lib Dems as the establishment party, and the Cons as insurgents.
As if the Lib Dems were concentrated in the South East or South more broadly, and the Cons were concentrated in the North.
The Liberals do well in Vancouver so maybe throw in Manchester or Newcastle to that analogy. I wouldn't say the Canadian Tories are insurgents either. Their current leadership has something of that tone (a bit like Kemi maybe) but they still have the same heartlands they've always had.
Trump will NOT resume military aid to Ukraine until Zelensky leaves the presidency — BILD
Fucking outrageous. Americans should all hang their heads in shame. They need to atone for a generation at least for inflicting this traitorous moron upon the world.
It does reflect very poorly on 49% of Americans, who knowingly elected an evil man, simply in order to “own the Libtards.”
They voted to cut immigration, which Trump likely will do and to push back woke and EDI, which he is doing and to cut cost of living, which his tariffs likely won't do unless they increase production of US made goods.
'Owning the Libtards' was only a factor in relation to the first 2 above
The US made goods are more expensive than the imports. That's why people buy the imports. Tariffs don't reduce the cost of domestic production. If anything, they allow domestic producers to raise their prices.
US consumers will take the hit. GOP donors will get the benefit.
Horse - you dislike Starlink. We get that. But so far you’ve made a series of strident statements which get rapidly demolished. Terrible latency? Nope. Can’t do meetings? Nope. Slower than 5G? Nope. Everyone is getting FTTP (Stop and Think about the practicalities of that one). Nope. Can’t work on a train. Nope.
Starlink may turn into a cul-de-sac technology. But here and now it offers genuinely fast and usable connectivity to people who literally have no other options. Where you insist the other options actually do exist and actually are faster and better actually.
I don’t work in the industry. You appear to do. Which means you know more that I do. But keep posting things that are demonstrably wrong in the real world because you’ve set your mind against it. Why is that? In my industry I start with the facts on the ground and build a narrative to explain them. Not decide on the narrative and be selective and manipulate of the “facts” to prove me right
Starlink's capabilities don't matter a jot if you are a non-MAGA government, or in a business which in any way competes with any of Musk's. Because you cannot rely on the service.
And I'd just say I find your constant hyping of Musk's products to be very much against what I thought were your values and morals.
How am I constantly hyping? Some products, yes. Partially. My latest Just Get A Tesla video slags off "FSD Capability" and describes it as "a con". Am I hyping FSD Capability? I'm saying that Tesla are being outrageous selling this thing which they know doesn't work. Is that me hyping them?
I've repeatedly poked a stick at autonomous vehicles - I fully expect they to get banned after the first nasty automation crash. I think the robot thing is absurd. I've attacked Neuralink.
What I don't do is adjust the facts to match what you insist should be "values and morals". Horse laid down a list of things that Starlink cannot do and was factually wrong. Stating that is neither hyping nor not hyping - it is what it is.
My morality is my morality. When I was younger and more strident I drank the cool-aid where my morality should be everyone's morality. I grew out of that long ago - and had to change party to best reflect that. What I think isn't necessarily what you think. Why do you think that what you think should be inviolate and adopted by others? If I want a lecture on morality I could go to church. Oh year, I stopped doing that as well...
What's the title of your channel again? Is it "Don't get a Tesla"?
No?
And my post commented on the technical merits of Starlink being pointless given the political shenanigans that Musk is performing with it.
And as for morality and values: wait until Musk and MAGA come after gay people. Or bisexuals. See my point now?
It's a car. It's not a man.
Starlink is a service. Should Starlink abruptly get switched off then I would have to revert back to shonky slow options. Are you saying that because of a theoretical event maybe in the future that shonky and slow is my best option now?
And MAGA are *already* going after anyone who isn't white Christian and straight. So what? Jenrick was foaming on about straight white Christians the other day. If I want to pay attention to homophobia I don't need to bother with MAGA.
What's your point? Which technologies / companies / political platforms are morally acceptable to you? I converted to Apple a couple of years ago - does that make me liable for the Uighurs too?
Don't Get a Tesla! There are plenty of other cars available.
and bollocks to people promoting Teslas on Youtube.
It's not really complicated. At all. You can twist yourself up in all kinds of mental bretzels and whataboutery so you don't feel so bad about yourself, but don't expect people on here not to call you out on it - and if you don't want anyone to lecture you on morality you're probably posting on the wrong forum!
Telling people to buy Teslas is fucking stupid unless you actively want the destruction of democracy and European liberal civilisation. Or maybe you just don't care enough about those things.
Good morning
That is simply harsh and unfair on Tesla owners who purchased their cars long before the Trump- Musk nightmare
Of course @RochdalePioneers doesn't want the destruction of democracy and European civilisation and I doubt owning or otherwise a Tesla has any relevance, other than the obnoxious and nasty Musk has a little bit less of his obscene wealth
And I would say, I have no interest in buying an ev either now or in the future and certainly have never owned one, though I have driven one
It's not about "Tesla owners who purchased their cars long before the Trump- Musk nightmare". It's about actively telling people now to buy Teslas.
Do you really think buying or promoting a Tesla is in anyway going to change Musk or Trump
I can understand your and others anger, but I will not join the pile on to @RochdalePioneers as seen this morning, and even though he and I have different politics, a sense of proportion is needed
Though as I said earlier I will not be buying a Tesla or any ev, as petrol cars will be available to 2035 and beyond by which time I will be in my 90s and my wife near 100, depending on the Good Lords generosity !!!!!
Um if nobody buys Teslas then Musk will be a lot poorer and have less power than he otherwise would. I find it hard to believe that anyone who isn't a fucking arsehole would consider buying a Tesla at this point, let alone promote them.
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Good summary. The Liberals always seem to have very resilient support in Montreal no matter what happens elsewhere.
Horse - you dislike Starlink. We get that. But so far you’ve made a series of strident statements which get rapidly demolished. Terrible latency? Nope. Can’t do meetings? Nope. Slower than 5G? Nope. Everyone is getting FTTP (Stop and Think about the practicalities of that one). Nope. Can’t work on a train. Nope.
Starlink may turn into a cul-de-sac technology. But here and now it offers genuinely fast and usable connectivity to people who literally have no other options. Where you insist the other options actually do exist and actually are faster and better actually.
I don’t work in the industry. You appear to do. Which means you know more that I do. But keep posting things that are demonstrably wrong in the real world because you’ve set your mind against it. Why is that? In my industry I start with the facts on the ground and build a narrative to explain them. Not decide on the narrative and be selective and manipulate of the “facts” to prove me right
Starlink's capabilities don't matter a jot if you are a non-MAGA government, or in a business which in any way competes with any of Musk's. Because you cannot rely on the service.
And I'd just say I find your constant hyping of Musk's products to be very much against what I thought were your values and morals.
How am I constantly hyping? Some products, yes. Partially. My latest Just Get A Tesla video slags off "FSD Capability" and describes it as "a con". Am I hyping FSD Capability? I'm saying that Tesla are being outrageous selling this thing which they know doesn't work. Is that me hyping them?
I've repeatedly poked a stick at autonomous vehicles - I fully expect they to get banned after the first nasty automation crash. I think the robot thing is absurd. I've attacked Neuralink.
What I don't do is adjust the facts to match what you insist should be "values and morals". Horse laid down a list of things that Starlink cannot do and was factually wrong. Stating that is neither hyping nor not hyping - it is what it is.
My morality is my morality. When I was younger and more strident I drank the cool-aid where my morality should be everyone's morality. I grew out of that long ago - and had to change party to best reflect that. What I think isn't necessarily what you think. Why do you think that what you think should be inviolate and adopted by others? If I want a lecture on morality I could go to church. Oh year, I stopped doing that as well...
What's the title of your channel again? Is it "Don't get a Tesla"?
No?
And my post commented on the technical merits of Starlink being pointless given the political shenanigans that Musk is performing with it.
And as for morality and values: wait until Musk and MAGA come after gay people. Or bisexuals. See my point now?
It's a car. It's not a man.
Starlink is a service. Should Starlink abruptly get switched off then I would have to revert back to shonky slow options. Are you saying that because of a theoretical event maybe in the future that shonky and slow is my best option now?
And MAGA are *already* going after anyone who isn't white Christian and straight. So what? Jenrick was foaming on about straight white Christians the other day. If I want to pay attention to homophobia I don't need to bother with MAGA.
What's your point? Which technologies / companies / political platforms are morally acceptable to you? I converted to Apple a couple of years ago - does that make me liable for the Uighurs too?
Don't Get a Tesla! There are plenty of other cars available.
and bollocks to people promoting Teslas on Youtube.
It's not really complicated. At all. You can twist yourself up in all kinds of mental bretzels and whataboutery so you don't feel so bad about yourself, but don't expect people on here not to call you out on it - and if you don't want anyone to lecture you on morality you're probably posting on the wrong forum!
Telling people to buy Teslas is fucking stupid unless you actively want the destruction of democracy and European liberal civilisation. Or maybe you just don't care enough about those things.
Good morning
That is simply harsh and unfair on Tesla owners who purchased their cars long before the Trump- Musk nightmare
Of course @RochdalePioneers doesn't want the destruction of democracy and European civilisation and I doubt owning or otherwise a Tesla has any relevance, other than the obnoxious and nasty Musk has a little bit less of his obscene wealth
And I would say, I have no interest in buying an ev either now or in the future and certainly have never owned one, though I have driven one
It's not about "Tesla owners who purchased their cars long before the Trump- Musk nightmare". It's about actively telling people now to buy Teslas.
Do you really think buying or promoting a Tesla is in anyway going to change Musk or Trump
I can understand your and others anger, but I will not join the pile on to @RochdalePioneers as seen this morning, and even though he and I have different politics, a sense of proportion is needed
Though as I said earlier I will not be buying a Tesla or any ev, as petrol cars will be available to 2035 and beyond by which time I will be in my 90s and my wife near 100, depending on the Good Lords generosity !!!!!
Um if nobody buys Teslas then Musk will be a lot poorer and have less power than he otherwise would. I find it hard to believe that anyone who isn't a fucking arsehole would consider buying a Tesla at this point, let alone promote them.
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
So it is a Scottish poll and is hugely relevant in the context of Westminster not least because Labour in Wales are also struggling
Also zero for Reform shows how sensible the Scots are
It isn't as whether a Labour or SNP MP is elected makes sod all difference in reality to whether Starmer stays in office as in the end both would back a Labour over Tory or Reform led government.
A Welsh only poll would be more significant as that would be more likely to show Reform and Tory gains from Labour than in Scotland
On this point we agree. Minimising Tory seats is all I care about in Scotland. Whether those non-Tory seats are Labour or SNP is a second-order consideration.
I think that is a thing a lot of people around here forget
Some people vote for a party Other people vote for anyone who will beat a particular party
And in some parts of the country - that vote is “beat the Tory” party in other places its “beat the Labour” Party
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Our son who lives in Vancouver indicated that the east included Toronto and Quebec are liberals whereas the west of Canada are conservatives but nobody seems sure who will win the election now
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Our son who lives in Vancouver indicated that the east included Toronto and Quebec are liberals whereas the west of Canada are conservatives but nobody seems sure who will win the election now
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Our son who lives in Vancouver indicated that the east included Toronto and Quebec are liberals whereas the west of Canada are conservatives but nobody seems sure who will win the election now
Maxime Bernier is closer to Trump than Poilievre who Trump called 'not maga enough'
Ok, but he's not a realistic candidate for PM. Poilievre is more polite than Trump, but that's not difficult. Also "Bernier was one of few leadership contenders to march in the Toronto Pride Parade" - Can't see Trump doing anything similar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxime_Bernier
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
So it is a Scottish poll and is hugely relevant in the context of Westminster not least because Labour in Wales are also struggling
Also zero for Reform shows how sensible the Scots are
It isn't as whether a Labour or SNP MP is elected makes sod all difference in reality to whether Starmer stays in office as in the end both would back a Labour over Tory or Reform led government.
A Welsh only poll would be more significant as that would be more likely to show Reform and Tory gains from Labour than in Scotland
On this point we agree. Minimising Tory seats is all I care about in Scotland. Whether those non-Tory seats are Labour or SNP is a second-order consideration.
I think that is a thing a lot of people around here forget
Some people vote for a party Other people vote for anyone who will beat a particular party
And in some parts of the country - that vote is “beat the Tory” party in other places its “beat the Labour” Party
... and everywhere that vote is "beat Reform" if they look like winning.
If I understand correctly, the “Liberals” in Canada are the elites, essentially a long-standing coalition of wet Tories and Lib Dem types, who draw their support from the upper crusts of Ontario.
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Our son who lives in Vancouver indicated that the east included Toronto and Quebec are liberals whereas the west of Canada are conservatives but nobody seems sure who will win the election now
Maxime Bernier is closer to Trump than Poilievre who Trump called 'not maga enough'
Ok, but he's not a realistic candidate for PM. Poilievre is more polite than Trump, but that's not difficult. Also "Bernier was one of few leadership contenders to march in the Toronto Pride Parade" - Can't see Trump doing anything similar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxime_Bernier
Rumours an Opinium Scottish poll is out showing Labour down to just 2 seats in Scotland with the SNP benefiting the most
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
It is a Scotland only Westminster NOT Holyrood poll so largely irrelevant as the SNP would support Labour over the Tories and Reform anyway (though if they won most MSPs again at Holyrood next year and had a majority there with the Greens again or even outright they might demand indyref2 as the price of keeping Starmer in office if they held the balance of power with the LDs in a hung parliament).
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
Oh, so you don't think that Scottish-consistuency [edit] *MPs* count? You won't be worried if Scotland becomes independent then.
Not where the choice is Labour or SNP as in a hung parliament both would vote for a Labour led government anyway.
I remain committed to the Union but it is possible on current polls the next GE is a hung parliament where the Tories and Reform combined win a majority of seats in England and Wales but Labour and the LDs and SNP win a majority UK wide, so Scottish MPs would keep Starmer as PM
Having just read 'Get In' which is the recent story of the Labour Party under Starmer and his chief of staff Morgan McSweeney it seems clear there is no longer any need for todays Tory Party.
Perhaps as an alternative but is there any point in another centre right party particularly one less competent less well led and with a slightly whiffy recent history?
I can't see any possibilty of the Tory Party winning again in the forseeable future. Labour can move left change personel and keep moving. The Tories look like they've got nowhere to go. Starmer's stolen their clothes and they look like a much better fit.
Comments
Time to move on and file phone masts under 'yawn'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Landry
I saw a few last week - without completely redesigning the barriers it’s going to be a hard issue to resolve because they are good at getting in and out of them
The UK also has a bigger military than Argentina and nukes, Greenland and Denmark have no nukes and a military a tiny fraction of the US' size
That is, heavily armed and trained to have -
I've got the understanding of a four year old
I've got the peace of mind of a killer's soul
I've got the rationale of a New York cop
I've got the patience of a chopping block
'Owning the Libtards' was only a factor in relation to the first 2 above
Elon Musk’s Ai cover of Paranoid Android was a particular highlight
The paintings aren't absolutely terrible it has to be said.
For a moment I thought the Billy Bunter character was HB's son - FFS, his dad's travails have made him grow up fast.
https://x.com/MaximeBernier/status/1876800398008164713?lang=en
https://www.peoplespartyofcanada.ca/news/maxime-berniers-response-to-trump-tariffs
I cannot find the poll so hope someone can find the actual poll and publish it
But this does rather raise the question of why Canada thinks it is a good idea to subsidise its oil and gas production to the extent that it does. Is it the case that their production costs make it otherwise uncompetitive in international markets?
If Trump and Milei decide to take back the Falklands then there is nothing we can do about it militarily
USA.
That means a hefty chunk of the Tories no matter what you claim.
Gives 44 SNP seats, 5 Tory and 5 LD seats, 2 Labour and 0 for Reform
https://www.gbnews.com/politics/scotland-labour-reform-snp-polls-map
"How did East Midland English Become the Standard Across the World?" - just under 20 minutes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKfp4wrvZys
I'd welcome comments from anyone who's beat this is on. It's very interesting, and may have something to do with this: (my photo quota)
https://www.youtube.com/@DaveHuxtableLanguages/videos
https://www.youtube.com/@DrGeoffLindsey/videos
https://www.youtube.com/@simonroper9218/videos
Also zero for Reform shows how sensible the Scots are
If you look at only the ex Progressive Conservatives wing of the Conservative Party (who were the actual historical Tories) and ignore the ex Reform party wing the percentage of Tories backing Trump is even less
The claim also isn't new and didn't die with defeat in the Falklands War. Argentina has consistently claimed and continues to claim sovereignty, notwithstanding the fairly recent and decisive referendum.
I also think it unlikely Milei has any great interest in it. He's basically parked the issue, saying it's likely to take decades to resolve (i.e. "not really my problem").
The irony
A Welsh only poll would be more significant as that would be more likely to show Reform and Tory gains from Labour than in Scotland
Hutchison 3G Ltd (“Three”) tried to do a large scale rollout and in many areas 80-90% of their applications were rejected. These are urban areas.
So no I don’t think it works well most of the time and I stand by that.
I’m open to accepting I am a minority on the rural landscape but in the urban environment frankly there shouldn’t be anything an MNO can’t build that isn’t PD.
There are many users here who I disagree with but at least responded to my point in an intellectually intelligent way. It’s a shame a few rotten apples decided not to.
Trump isn't going to go to war with the UK over the Falklands in any circumstance even if Milei did (and he has said he won't as it is a matter for Falkland Islanders and he is too busy slashing the size of the Argentine state)
But the world is supposed to cutting such subsidies with a view to making fossil fuels less attractive. It doesn't look like Canada is trying very hard.
Of course, the fact that the vast weight of Canadian exports to the US are of raw materials once again demonstrates what a complete numpty Trump is. Why would putting tariffs on those be good for the US economy? It simply increases their costs and reduces the competitiveness of products made with those materials.
Calling fellow posters rotten apples because they have a different view or annoy you is your problem and you need to live with it
I remain committed to the Union but it is possible on current polls the next GE is a hung parliament where the Tories and Reform combined win a majority of seats in England and Wales but Labour and the LDs and SNP win a majority UK wide, so Scottish MPs would keep Starmer as PM
The “Tories” on the other hand are an uneasy alliance of dyed-in-the-wool traditionalists (ukippy) and free market drill-baby-drillers from the oil provinces.
Therefore, despite the name, the Liberals are the establishment and the Tories are insurgents in the Canadian model.
Had Ukraine kept its nukes in the 1990s Putin would certainly not have invaded and if Canada and Greenland came under the French and/or UK nuclear missile umbrella Trump would not be threatening them with annexation
Yesterday when driving home from Whitby we got fog driving through Saltburn and my car’s front assist alerted that it wasn’t able to work
The NDP are the social democrat left of centre party ie the Canadian Labour Party (though they would be left of Starmer) and the BQ are basically the Canadian SNP
(FPTP is going to give some hair-trigger overreactions to small shifts in Scotland. It has been insanely unproportional for a while, and Reform's intervention will make that worse.)
"If you stub your toe on a rock, you can be sure an Englishman left it there."
And the standard way of blaming others for your misfortune is
"کار، کارِ انگلیسیهاست"
Which means "It’s the work of the English."
I've tried to explain to every Persian/Iranian that I meet that, it shouldn't be all English that are blamed: it should solely be @Leon, but they just look at me in a bemused manner.
As if the Lib Dems were concentrated in the South East or South more broadly, and the Cons were concentrated in the North.
Though Germans mostly did see it as a Hitlergruß, which may not be unconnected to the 80% fall in Tesla sales in Germany in February.
The Liberals do well in Vancouver so maybe throw in Manchester or Newcastle to that analogy. I wouldn't say the Canadian Tories are insurgents either. Their current leadership has something of that tone (a bit like Kemi maybe) but they still have the same heartlands they've always had.
US consumers will take the hit. GOP donors will get the benefit.
NEW THREAD
Some people vote for a party
Other people vote for anyone who will beat a particular party
And in some parts of the country - that vote is “beat the Tory” party in other places its “beat the Labour” Party
Nonetheless @Mexicanpete endorses the first section of this message.
https://cultmtl.com/2025/03/pierre-poilievre-is-the-worst-person-to-stand-up-to-donald-trump-he-worships-the-man-liberal-party-leadership-debate/
Poilievre is more polite than Trump, but that's not difficult.
Also "Bernier was one of few leadership contenders to march in the Toronto Pride Parade" - Can't see Trump doing anything similar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxime_Bernier
Perhaps as an alternative but is there any point in another centre right party particularly one less competent less well led and with a slightly whiffy recent history?
I can't see any possibilty of the Tory Party winning again in the forseeable future. Labour can move left change personel and keep moving. The Tories look like they've got nowhere to go. Starmer's stolen their clothes and they look like a much better fit.
Trumps utterances not so good for your portfolio..🧐🥴