'Here we are again, people telling us labour is finished. If Labour still leads most polls, how bad must the Tories be. And the Putin party ?. They have peaked'
I wonder who posted this just yesterday ?
I did speculate, on here, that the autumn statement would badly knock Labour in the polls, POSSIBLY sending them below 20 (which would be incredible)
This is painfully close
What is their floor? Do they have a floor any more?
@KevinASchofield Kemi Badenoch on Adolescence: "It's based on a real story, but my understanding is that the boy who committed that crime was not white."
Adolescence creator Jack Thorne: "There is no part of this that’s based on a true story, not one single part.”
He'd have been better off saying specific rather than true.
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
The top bin man in NYC looks like a General in the Peruvian Air Force.
Thank you for that, it's superb! That's exactly the sort of thing I was talking about.
We on the other hand have this.
There’s probably an argument to be had about whether having a pseudo militarised society or hierarchical class cos play one is worse (marginally the former I think).
@KevinASchofield Kemi Badenoch on Adolescence: "It's based on a real story, but my understanding is that the boy who committed that crime was not white."
Adolescence creator Jack Thorne: "There is no part of this that’s based on a true story, not one single part.”
He'd have been better off saying specific rather than true.
'Here we are again, people telling us labour is finished. If Labour still leads most polls, how bad must the Tories be. And the Putin party ?. They have peaked'
I wonder who posted this just yesterday ?
I did speculate, on here, that the autumn statement would badly knock Labour in the polls, POSSIBLY sending them below 20 (which would be incredible)
This is painfully close
What is their floor? Do they have a floor any more?
And does it matter until we get a few more years into the election cycle?
'Here we are again, people telling us labour is finished. If Labour still leads most polls, how bad must the Tories be. And the Putin party ?. They have peaked'
I wonder who posted this just yesterday ?
I did speculate, on here, that the autumn statement would badly knock Labour in the polls, POSSIBLY sending them below 20 (which would be incredible)
This is painfully close
What is their floor? Do they have a floor any more?
And does it matter until we get a few more years into the election cycle?
That probably depends if Starmer is a Major or a Cameron - something we’ll only be able to tell with hindsight.
'Here we are again, people telling us labour is finished. If Labour still leads most polls, how bad must the Tories be. And the Putin party ?. They have peaked'
I wonder who posted this just yesterday ?
I did speculate, on here, that the autumn statement would badly knock Labour in the polls, POSSIBLY sending them below 20 (which would be incredible)
This is painfully close
What is their floor? Do they have a floor any more?
And does it matter until we get a few more years into the election cycle?
Does it matter? DOES IT MATTER???
This is PB. Imagine if we didn’t talk about polls because “it doesn’t matter”
A stunning *13* Cabinet ministers would be defeated:
🔴 Angela Rayner (to REF) 🔴 Shabana Mahmood (to IND) 🔴 Ed Miliband (to REF) 🔴 Bridget Phillipson (to REF) 🔴 Wes Streeting (to IND) 🔴 Rachel Reeves (to REF) 🔴 Liz Kendall (to REF) 🔴 Yvette Cooper (to REF) 🔴 John Healey (to REF) 🔴 Jonathan Reynolds (to REF) 🔴 Heidi Alexander (to CON) 🔴 Lisa Nandy (to REF) 🔴 Pat McFadden (to REF)
Rachel has to go.
She's acting as a lightning rod but also creating a narrative about Labour taking tough decisions in the national interest.
I would expect, in a couple of years, that she will be transferred (Foreign Office?) and a new chancellor brought in as the spending brakes are released. It's a pretty obvious political strategy and may work, particularly in the context of a split right with neither Tories nor Reform looking notably credible as governments-in-waiting.
It's a grim poll for Labour but no need for panic just yet. And the local elections don't have that much potential to damage Labour, as the focus will be on the Tories and Reform.
Last night I watched a good documentary on BBC2 about the ship that collided with the Francis Scott Key bridge in Baltimore – how it happened, how the situation was remediated and how to prevent it from happening again. As you might expect, there were numerous different US agencies involved, from the Coastguard to the shipping safety people to the infrastructure engineers and the Highway authorities. What I noticed was the surprisingly large number of uniforms on display. Almost every agency had its own livery, badges, shields and the like. For a civilian country, it seemed surprisingly macho and militaristic. If the same thing had happened at, say, the Severn Bridge, I dare say the Brits would have turned up with a few logos and some branding, maybe a fleece or two, but not to the same extent.
I once read that in the run-up to the First World War, one fifth of the working population in Vienna wore uniforms. I wonder if it’s healthy.
The top bin man in NYC looks like a General in the Peruvian Air Force.
Thank you for that, it's superb! That's exactly the sort of thing I was talking about.
We on the other hand have this.
There’s probably an argument to be had about whether having a pseudo militarised society or hierarchical class cos play one is worse (marginally the former I think).
@KevinASchofield Kemi Badenoch on Adolescence: "It's based on a real story, but my understanding is that the boy who committed that crime was not white."
Adolescence creator Jack Thorne: "There is no part of this that’s based on a true story, not one single part.”
He'd have been better off saying specific rather than true.
When we started studying WW2 in secondary school, our school chose to let us watch Where Eagles Dare in the School Hall. It was relatively entertaining, and gave an introduction (though possibly not a wholly true to life one) of the two sides in the conflict.
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
The idea that Starmer comments about the series and that it was good that it was available for schools to screen, should they wish to do so, is some sort of 'enforced watching' is classic kneejerk Twitter bullshit and it's tiresome.
A stunning *13* Cabinet ministers would be defeated:
🔴 Angela Rayner (to REF) 🔴 Shabana Mahmood (to IND) 🔴 Ed Miliband (to REF) 🔴 Bridget Phillipson (to REF) 🔴 Wes Streeting (to IND) 🔴 Rachel Reeves (to REF) 🔴 Liz Kendall (to REF) 🔴 Yvette Cooper (to REF) 🔴 John Healey (to REF) 🔴 Jonathan Reynolds (to REF) 🔴 Heidi Alexander (to CON) 🔴 Lisa Nandy (to REF) 🔴 Pat McFadden (to REF)
Rachel has to go.
She's acting as a lightning rod but also creating a narrative about Labour taking tough decisions in the national interest.
I would expect, in a couple of years, that she will be transferred (Foreign Office?) and a new chancellor brought in as the spending brakes are released. It's a pretty obvious political strategy and may work, particularly in the context of a split right with neither Tories nor Reform looking notably credible as governments-in-waiting.
It's a grim poll for Labour but no need for panic just yet. And the local elections don't have that much potential to damage Labour, as the focus will be on the Tories and Reform.
A poll where you don’t need to panic, as the governing party in the UK, is a poll putting you just under 30
When you are at 21 and in third place and stupendously and historically unpopular (and still falling) and with no policies or plan for getting out of this mess, then yes, I think a soupçon of panic is justified
@KevinASchofield Kemi Badenoch on Adolescence: "It's based on a real story, but my understanding is that the boy who committed that crime was not white."
Adolescence creator Jack Thorne: "There is no part of this that’s based on a true story, not one single part.”
He'd have been better off saying specific rather than true.
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
'Here we are again, people telling us labour is finished. If Labour still leads most polls, how bad must the Tories be. And the Putin party ?. They have peaked'
I wonder who posted this just yesterday ?
I did speculate, on here, that the autumn statement would badly knock Labour in the polls, POSSIBLY sending them below 20 (which would be incredible)
This is painfully close
What is their floor? Do they have a floor any more?
And does it matter until we get a few more years into the election cycle?
Does it matter? DOES IT MATTER???
This is PB. Imagine if we didn’t talk about polls because “it doesn’t matter”
IT ALWAYS MATTERS
Had to Like that, Leon, but what have Vanilla done to our Like button? You can't see who your friends are any more.
Can you use your fluence, please, to get this sorted?
A stunning *13* Cabinet ministers would be defeated:
🔴 Angela Rayner (to REF) 🔴 Shabana Mahmood (to IND) 🔴 Ed Miliband (to REF) 🔴 Bridget Phillipson (to REF) 🔴 Wes Streeting (to IND) 🔴 Rachel Reeves (to REF) 🔴 Liz Kendall (to REF) 🔴 Yvette Cooper (to REF) 🔴 John Healey (to REF) 🔴 Jonathan Reynolds (to REF) 🔴 Heidi Alexander (to CON) 🔴 Lisa Nandy (to REF) 🔴 Pat McFadden (to REF)
Rachel has to go.
She's acting as a lightning rod but also creating a narrative about Labour taking tough decisions in the national interest.
I would expect, in a couple of years, that she will be transferred (Foreign Office?) and a new chancellor brought in as the spending brakes are released. It's a pretty obvious political strategy and may work, particularly in the context of a split right with neither Tories nor Reform looking notably credible as governments-in-waiting.
It's a grim poll for Labour but no need for panic just yet. And the local elections don't have that much potential to damage Labour, as the focus will be on the Tories and Reform.
A poll where you don’t need to panic, as the governing party in the UK, is a poll putting you just under 30
When you are at 21 and in third place and stupendously and historically unpopular (and still falling) and with no policies or plan for getting out of this mess, then yes, I think a soupçon of panic is justified
thac Well, yes, but as we see public opinion is so much more volatile than before. Party loyalties have broken down reducing the "floor" the parties can rely on.
Labour could get well and truly smashed but it isn't written in stone as it was for Sunak's Tories. They were doomed. Starmer could still recover.
And the "plan" is tough times now, but better times ahead of the election. So long as they look serious and responsible there's a chance particularly with a flailing opposition and someone like Farage dominating the airwaves, and the example of MAGA across the pond.
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
I also can't see this, roughly 25/25/25 situation lasting indefinitely so I think,in the end, one of the top three (Con/Lab/Ref) will break through and leave the other two behind.
People will vote for the real thing over pallid imitation. Will Labour never learn?
They need to have a left of centre government that isn't ashamed of being left wing if they want left wing voters to turn out for them.
Well they tried that with Corbyn and the result was suboptimal?
The truth is, Labour and especially Starmer, were never popular in Opposition it was just a case that the Tories became even more unpopular and the only alternative to a Con government was a Lab government.
But it was always obvious that once in power, Labour and Starmer woulds prove very unpopular. The implosion has been spectacular and very unusual in it's quickness, though.
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
Tactical voting often hinges on which party the voter really wants to lose. I would imagine that Reform would be top of that list. They may have come third in 2024 with 14.3% but their MPs could fit in an original Mini.
@KevinASchofield Kemi Badenoch on Adolescence: "It's based on a real story, but my understanding is that the boy who committed that crime was not white."
Adolescence creator Jack Thorne: "There is no part of this that’s based on a true story, not one single part.”
He'd have been better off saying specific rather than true.
Interesting that Badenoch chooses to say that the race of the killer has been changed.
If she's referring to the Croydon case, she might just as well have said that her understanding was that the victim was not white.
When we started studying WW2 in secondary school, our school chose to let us watch Where Eagles Dare in the School Hall. It was relatively entertaining, and gave an introduction (though possibly not a wholly true to life one) of the two sides in the conflict.
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
The idea that Starmer comments about the series and that it was good that it was available for schools to screen, should they wish to do so, is some sort of 'enforced watching' is classic kneejerk Twitter bullshit and it's tiresome.
My reading of it is that Starmer has been instrumental in the initiative to make it 'available', but I'm open to that being shown to be a mistake.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
A stunning *13* Cabinet ministers would be defeated:
🔴 Angela Rayner (to REF) 🔴 Shabana Mahmood (to IND) 🔴 Ed Miliband (to REF) 🔴 Bridget Phillipson (to REF) 🔴 Wes Streeting (to IND) 🔴 Rachel Reeves (to REF) 🔴 Liz Kendall (to REF) 🔴 Yvette Cooper (to REF) 🔴 John Healey (to REF) 🔴 Jonathan Reynolds (to REF) 🔴 Heidi Alexander (to CON) 🔴 Lisa Nandy (to REF) 🔴 Pat McFadden (to REF)
Rachel has to go.
She's acting as a lightning rod but also creating a narrative about Labour taking tough decisions in the national interest.
I would expect, in a couple of years, that she will be transferred (Foreign Office?) and a new chancellor brought in as the spending brakes are released. It's a pretty obvious political strategy and may work, particularly in the context of a split right with neither Tories nor Reform looking notably credible as governments-in-waiting.
It's a grim poll for Labour but no need for panic just yet. And the local elections don't have that much potential to damage Labour, as the focus will be on the Tories and Reform.
A poll where you don’t need to panic, as the governing party in the UK, is a poll putting you just under 30
When you are at 21 and in third place and stupendously and historically unpopular (and still falling) and with no policies or plan for getting out of this mess, then yes, I think a soupçon of panic is justified
It is a wonderful poll. 51% right wing. More please.
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
I also can't see this, roughly 25/25/25 situation lasting indefinitely so I think,in the end, one of the top three (Con/Lab/Ref) will break through and leave the other two behind.
But which one will it be?
Or will we see a big right wing tactical voting campaign? On those numbers it wouldn't take much effort to give Ref + Con a stonking majority. And that's probably the best outcome too - the Tories should know how to use the levers of government, Reform should keep them honest, and force them to govern right.
When we started studying WW2 in secondary school, our school chose to let us watch Where Eagles Dare in the School Hall. It was relatively entertaining, and gave an introduction (though possibly not a wholly true to life one) of the two sides in the conflict.
The enforced watching of a violence-themed drama is classic Starmer and it's loathsome.
I think Trump deporting people illegally without due process is loathsome. I think the Israeli army shooting paramedics is loathsome. I think the Myanmar regime bombing areas of the country hit by the earthquake is loathsome. Showing kids a Netflix drama is not something that seems to warrant such a word.
People will vote for the real thing over pallid imitation. Will Labour never learn?
They need to have a left of centre government that isn't ashamed of being left wing if they want left wing voters to turn out for them.
Well they tried that with Corbyn and the result was suboptimal?
The truth is, Labour and especially Starmer, were never popular in Opposition it was just a case that the Tories became even more unpopular and the only alternative to a Con government was a Lab government.
But it was always obvious that once in power, Labour and Starmer woulds prove very unpopular. The implosion has been spectacular and very unusual in it's quickness, though.
I think Starmers Labour would be relieved to do as well at the next election as Corbyn 2019, and ecstatic if they could poll as well as Corbyn 2017
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
I also can't see this, roughly 25/25/25 situation lasting indefinitely so I think,in the end, one of the top three (Con/Lab/Ref) will break through and leave the other two behind.
But which one will it be?
Or will we see a big right wing tactical voting campaign? On those numbers it wouldn't take much effort to give Ref + Con a stonking majority. And that's probably the best outcome too - the Tories should know how to use the levers of government, Reform should keep them honest, and force them to govern right.
It's funny how we can't resist adding up Reform and Conservative. Even I do it instinctively, even though the evidence is clear that it's not correct.
Some of the issue polling suggests that Conservative voters are closer to LD and Labour than they are Reform. If we're going to see tactical voting from Conservative voters, it might be in the other direction.
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
Tactical voting often hinges on which party the voter really wants to lose. I would imagine that Reform would be top of that list. They may have come third in 2024 with 14.3% but their MPs could fit in an original Mini.
Both Labour and the Tories have hugely disappointed the electorate. There now seems to be a split, not between left and right (sorry HYUFD), but between socially conservative, who are supporting Reform, and socially liberal, who are supporting the Lib Dems. Instead of “it’s the economy, stupid”, its now “they’re all stupid on the economy, let’s vote on other issues”.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
@KevinASchofield Kemi Badenoch on Adolescence: "It's based on a real story, but my understanding is that the boy who committed that crime was not white."
Adolescence creator Jack Thorne: "There is no part of this that’s based on a true story, not one single part.”
He'd have been better off saying specific rather than true.
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
I also can't see this, roughly 25/25/25 situation lasting indefinitely so I think,in the end, one of the top three (Con/Lab/Ref) will break through and leave the other two behind.
But which one will it be?
Or will we see a big right wing tactical voting campaign? On those numbers it wouldn't take much effort to give Ref + Con a stonking majority. And that's probably the best outcome too - the Tories should know how to use the levers of government, Reform should keep them honest, and force them to govern right.
It's funny how we can't resist adding up Reform and Conservative. Even I do it instinctively, even though the evidence is clear that it's not correct.
Some of the issue polling suggests that Conservative voters are closer to LD and Labour than they are Reform. If we're going to see tactical voting from Conservative voters, it might be in the other direction.
And Reform UK voters are often viscerally anti Conservative and will consider other alternatives.
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
I also can't see this, roughly 25/25/25 situation lasting indefinitely so I think,in the end, one of the top three (Con/Lab/Ref) will break through and leave the other two behind.
But which one will it be?
Why can’t it last?
There’s no law that says “everyone must shuffle round until one party gets 40%+ of the vote”
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
I also can't see this, roughly 25/25/25 situation lasting indefinitely so I think,in the end, one of the top three (Con/Lab/Ref) will break through and leave the other two behind.
But which one will it be?
Or will we see a big right wing tactical voting campaign? On those numbers it wouldn't take much effort to give Ref + Con a stonking majority. And that's probably the best outcome too - the Tories should know how to use the levers of government, Reform should keep them honest, and force them to govern right.
It's funny how we can't resist adding up Reform and Conservative. Even I do it instinctively, even though the evidence is clear that it's not correct.
Some of the issue polling suggests that Conservative voters are closer to LD and Labour than they are Reform. If we're going to see tactical voting from Conservative voters, it might be in the other direction.
And Reform UK voters are often viscerally anti Conservative and will consider other alternatives.
According to YouGov, more Reform voters think Labour/Conservatives are similar than they do Conservative/Reform. 41% to 27%.
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
I also can't see this, roughly 25/25/25 situation lasting indefinitely so I think,in the end, one of the top three (Con/Lab/Ref) will break through and leave the other two behind.
But which one will it be?
Or will we see a big right wing tactical voting campaign? On those numbers it wouldn't take much effort to give Ref + Con a stonking majority. And that's probably the best outcome too - the Tories should know how to use the levers of government, Reform should keep them honest, and force them to govern right.
It's funny how we can't resist adding up Reform and Conservative. Even I do it instinctively, even though the evidence is clear that it's not correct.
Some of the issue polling suggests that Conservative voters are closer to LD and Labour than they are Reform. If we're going to see tactical voting from Conservative voters, it might be in the other direction.
And Reform UK voters are often viscerally anti Conservative and will consider other alternatives.
According to YouGov, more Reform voters think Labour/Conservatives are similar than they do Conservative/Reform. 41% to 27%.
The US judge making a victory speech is, from a British perspective, completely ******.
There's no way any MAGA supporting American could be confident that they would get a fair trial under her, and the whole thing just feeds the idea there is a "deep state" undermining the elected government.
You also had the White House yesterday saying that US immigration judges work for the DoJ and must rule in line with government policy. America might be irretrievably broken.
How can the liberal Judge be a member of the "deep state" when she has been elected to her position ?
The MAGA idea of the "deep state" is that it is an unelected bureacracy with its own hidden liberal agenda, and which works to undermine elected right-wing office-holders & stops these politicians from carrying out their conservative agenda.
Not only has the liberal Judge has been elected to her office, but she openly stated that she would be a liberal Judge.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
I'm torn between liking that post, and pointing out that you would deny my transgender son the same right.
The US judge making a victory speech is, from a British perspective, completely ******.
There's no way any MAGA supporting American could be confident that they would get a fair trial under her, and the whole thing just feeds the idea there is a "deep state" undermining the elected government.
You also had the White House yesterday saying that US immigration judges work for the DoJ and must rule in line with government policy. America might be irretrievably broken.
How can the liberal Judge be a member of the "deep state" when she has been elected to her position ?
The MAGA idea of the "deep state" is that it is an unelected bureacracy with its own hidden liberal agenda, and which works to undermine elected right-wing office-holders & stops these politicians from carrying out their conservative agenda.
Not only has the liberal Judge has been elected to her office, but she openly stated that she would be a liberal Judge.
Republicans are elected. Democrats are deep state operatives put in place by Soros’s money.
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
I also can't see this, roughly 25/25/25 situation lasting indefinitely so I think,in the end, one of the top three (Con/Lab/Ref) will break through and leave the other two behind.
But which one will it be?
Or will we see a big right wing tactical voting campaign? On those numbers it wouldn't take much effort to give Ref + Con a stonking majority. And that's probably the best outcome too - the Tories should know how to use the levers of government, Reform should keep them honest, and force them to govern right.
It's funny how we can't resist adding up Reform and Conservative. Even I do it instinctively, even though the evidence is clear that it's not correct.
Some of the issue polling suggests that Conservative voters are closer to LD and Labour than they are Reform. If we're going to see tactical voting from Conservative voters, it might be in the other direction.
And Reform UK voters are often viscerally anti Conservative and will consider other alternatives.
According to YouGov, more Reform voters think Labour/Conservatives are similar than they do Conservative/Reform. 41% to 27%.
Musk is now saying that spaffing $25m up the wall and getting spanked in Wisconsin was "losing a piece for positional gain"
Makes it more likely they fix future elections, so yes he is correct as much as he shouldn't be.
Crawford's election is more likely to fix elections in favour of the Democrats if, as expected, she gets to decide a case to fix Wisconsin's gerrymandered districts.
Of those who picked Reform UK as their top party, their second choice party was…
Con 54 LD 16 Grn 16 Lab 13
Of those who picked the Conservatives first…
Ref 40 LD 30 Lab 21 Grn 7
At first glance the 32% of the Reform vote who would choose LD or Green next seems counter-intuitive, as it's hard to imagine parties that are more polar opposite. However, that reflects most of the NOTA vote which I've always reckoned to be about 10% and much of it used to vote LD until the Coalition.
Musk is now saying that spaffing $25m up the wall and getting spanked in Wisconsin was "losing a piece for positional gain"
Makes it more likely they fix future elections, so yes he is correct as much as he shouldn't be.
Crawford's election is more likely to fix elections in favour of the Democrats if, as expected, she gets to decide a case to fix Wisconsin's gerrymandered districts.
That has been the status quo for decades now in the bonkers US system. I am talking about future changes not part of the current "game".
I still think we’re in a bit of a “something’s got to give” stage in the polling, because it is hard to see three parties polling so closely together being sustained when the public has to make a choice approaching the next GE.
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
I also can't see this, roughly 25/25/25 situation lasting indefinitely so I think,in the end, one of the top three (Con/Lab/Ref) will break through and leave the other two behind.
But which one will it be?
Why can’t it last?
There’s no law that says “everyone must shuffle round until one party gets 40%+ of the vote”
Well yes, we might keep the 25/25/25 situation going until 2029, but given the ebb and flow of public opinion it feels intuitively that one of the three will eventually break forwards....
But time will tell, as ever.
Off to enjoy the glorious sunshine. Have a good afternoon, PB 👍
Props to this guy. While his political opinions are a fairly long way to the right, he recognises the importance of equal access to the law in a liberal democracy. And is acting accordingly here.
The right’s legal heavyweight takes on Trump https://thehill.com/newsletters/the-gavel/5226754-trump-law-firms-legal-heavyweight/ President Trump has an unlikely foe in his efforts to target Big Law firms: Paul Clement. Clement is a conservative legal heavyweight who served as solicitor general in President George W. Bush’s administration and has argued more than 100 cases before the Supreme Court. He has notched major conservative victories at the court, including expanding the Second Amendment, ending deference to federal agencies and enabling a high school football coach to pray on the field with students. Now, Clement is taking on WilmerHale as a client as it sues the president over his executive order restricting the firm’s attorneys’ security clearances and access to federal buildings. “The Order is not only a threat to WilmerHale, but inimical to our Nation’s constitutional order and the rule of law,” Clement wrote in court filings. It’s an interesting position for Clement, who twice resigned from Big Law firms to keep representing conservative positions. In 2011, Clement left King & Spalding when it withdrew from representing the House of Representatives in defending the Defense of Marriage Act. And years later, he resigned from Kirland & Ellis after it announced it would no longer handle cases implicating the Second Amendment. ..
Of those who picked Reform UK as their top party, their second choice party was…
Con 54 LD 16 Grn 16 Lab 13
Of those who picked the Conservatives first…
Ref 40 LD 30 Lab 21 Grn 7
At first glance the 32% of the Reform vote who would choose LD or Green next seems counter-intuitive, as it's hard to imagine parties that are more polar opposite. However, that reflects most of the NOTA vote which I've always reckoned to be about 10% and much of it used to vote LD until the Coalition.
Additionally, if you were strongly motivated by a desire to break the two party system and bring about electoral reform, you’d be shopping between the LibDems, Greens and Reform.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
People will vote for the real thing over pallid imitation. Will Labour never learn?
They need to have a left of centre government that isn't ashamed of being left wing if they want left wing voters to turn out for them.
Under normal circumstances I'd agree with you but this time it's different.
However much any of us are fed up with Starmer (and God knows we are) while his opposition is Farage and the Tories we have absolutely no alternative but to make sure Labour win.
Ideally that would be with the help of the Lib Dems and Greens but the first responsibility is to ensure Farage gets nowhere near
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
Damn. My next article is on hyper-liberalism per John Gray, but the one after that was tentatively on trans, and I don't know if I can get it out in time. Is "soon" days, weeks or months, or is that too specific?
'Here we are again, people telling us labour is finished. If Labour still leads most polls, how bad must the Tories be. And the Putin party ?. They have peaked'
I wonder who posted this just yesterday ?
You don't like Horse do you?
Perhaps you could once again ask the Mods to intervene.
'Here we are again, people telling us labour is finished. If Labour still leads most polls, how bad must the Tories be. And the Putin party ?. They have peaked'
I wonder who posted this just yesterday ?
You don't like Horse do you?
Perhaps you could once again ask the Mods to intervene.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
Damn. My next article is on hyper-liberalism per John Gray, but the one after that was tentatively on trans, and I don't know if I can get it out in time. Is "soon" days, weeks or months, or is that too specific?
John Gray, the author of "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus"? Or John Gray, the author of "False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism"?
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
Damn. My next article is on hyper-liberalism per John Gray, but the one after that was tentatively on trans, and I don't know if I can get it out in time. Is "soon" days, weeks or months, or is that too specific?
Oh joy, nothing better than PB having a trans argument.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
Damn. My next article is on hyper-liberalism per John Gray, but the one after that was tentatively on trans, and I don't know if I can get it out in time. Is "soon" days, weeks or months, or is that too specific?
I shall do an analysis of the judgment and its consequences. I shall be writing about what it means for women and their rights under the Equality Act since that is what the case is fundamentally about. So feel free to write about trans stuff. (Incidentally, a while back you wrote a comment about the issue of single sex loos and changing rooms in workplaces. What you wrote was not legally accurate. What the legal position is is set out here - https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2025/02/26/something-for-everyone/).
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
Damn. My next article is on hyper-liberalism per John Gray, but the one after that was tentatively on trans, and I don't know if I can get it out in time. Is "soon" days, weeks or months, or is that too specific?
John Gray, the author of "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus"? Or John Gray, the author of "False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism"?
That John Gray has his fans on PB, chiefly Andy_JS, although there are others. I like reading him but by all in Heaven above he overwrites, and in TNL:TAL you can lose the middle section entirely. Seriously: I think he mashed together notes from two different books.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
Damn. My next article is on hyper-liberalism per John Gray, but the one after that was tentatively on trans, and I don't know if I can get it out in time. Is "soon" days, weeks or months, or is that too specific?
Oh joy, nothing better than PB having a trans argument.
Back to trains? Personally, Im still in favour of HS2.
However, when I read the comments here, including Ms Cyclefree's header article I'm motivated to think back EVER SO many years to my own youth. Fortunately or not I've quite a good memory and even at my advanced age, when I check it with facts or documents..... such as my diary ..... it's usually right. Or near enough. And being 'dumped', especially by someone who you care about a great deal, and thought she cared about you hurts. And indeed, if she did, or said she did, up until, on reflection, shortly before the 'dumping', it hurts badly.
I still recall one such occasion and, when I told an acquaintance about it, he suggested he get a group together and we go out and find the 'new' couple and 'deal with them'. I don't know quite what he had in mind, and didn't accept his offer, but I often wondered what I would do if I did see them together and sometimes went looking. On reflection I don't know what I'd have actually done had I found them, TBH, and perhaps it's better that I didn't.
Better to do what I did, which was try to find a replacement, which, after half a dozen or so false starts I did.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
Damn. My next article is on hyper-liberalism per John Gray, but the one after that was tentatively on trans, and I don't know if I can get it out in time. Is "soon" days, weeks or months, or is that too specific?
John Gray, the author of "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus"? Or John Gray, the author of "False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism"?
That John Gray has his fans on PB, chiefly Andy_JS, although there are others. I like reading him but by all in Heaven above he overwrites, and in TNL:TAL you can lose the middle section entirely. Seriously: I think he mashed together notes from two different books.
He does:
I have a collection of his essays (Grays Anatomy), and they are short, sharpy and to the point. Since he retired from the LSE, and/or he no longer has an editor, his essay length has grown and grown and grown.
He also has an irritating habit of saying the same thing three times. That is, he'll make a point, and then make exactly the same point. Because it's important to keep saying the same thing.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
Damn. My next article is on hyper-liberalism per John Gray, but the one after that was tentatively on trans, and I don't know if I can get it out in time. Is "soon" days, weeks or months, or is that too specific?
I shall do an analysis of the judgment and its consequences. I shall be writing about what it means for women and their rights under the Equality Act since that is what the case is fundamentally about. So feel free to write about trans stuff. (Incidentally, a while back you wrote a comment about the issue of single sex loos and changing rooms in workplaces. What you wrote was not legally accurate. What the legal position is is set out here - https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2025/02/26/something-for-everyone/).
So of the 2 options it sounds like businesses could be liable regardless of whether they go for a number 1 or a number 2?
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
@Cyclefree , you are a lawyer. Do you know when the Supreme Court FWS case is due to report?
I don't know. The date will be published on the Supreme Court's website. But I have heard rumours that it is likely to be soon. The court itself seemed to indicate some time in the spring.
Damn. My next article is on hyper-liberalism per John Gray, but the one after that was tentatively on trans, and I don't know if I can get it out in time. Is "soon" days, weeks or months, or is that too specific?
John Gray, the author of "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus"? Or John Gray, the author of "False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism"?
Sainsbury's was deserted today. People may be feeling the pinch.
brexit benefit?
I can't work out if not being in the EU when these Trump tariffs are announced are a Brexit benefit or not. Trying to get an unbiased view is hard
It's a shame irony is difficult to show in writing...
Oh I know you weren't being serious! But I seriously do wonder. I personally think having the clout of the EU in our corner would be a plus, but I genuinely am prepared to hear counter arguments.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
I'm torn between liking that post, and pointing out that you would deny my transgender son the same right.
Except - as I have said repeatedly - I would not deny him the right to say that he is transgender. Nor for him to say that he feels his gender is female. Nor for him to present himself in public in whatever way he wants and call himself by whatever name he wants. Nor would I deny him the right to have the legal protections he is afforded by the GRA and under the gender reassignment protected characteristic in the Equality Act. (Apologies in advance if I have got your son's position the wrong way round.
But if he can say his sex (as opposed to his gender) is female when it isn't and can never be, then I and every other woman are denied the right to have single sex spaces, services and associations. Indeed the current legal position in Scotland is that lesbians cannot meet in an association of more than 24 and keep men out. And, as the Scottish government made clear in its submissions to the Supreme Court last November, its position is that transwomen (ie men who claim to be women) are not women, unless they have a GRC ie TW are not women. So maybe direct your complaints to the Scottish government.
You MUST come to Uzbekistan. It’s an incredible destination. There are direct flights to Tashkent from Heathrow
Once you are here you can see the remarkable essence of the country in a week, and in two weeks you could take in a bit of Kazakhstan or Kyrgyzstan
Bukhara and Samarkand are spellbinding. The Registan (main square) in Samarkand rivals St Marks in Venice as a purely beautiful public space
I cannot think of a rival
Well yes, apart from the torture, arbitrary arrests, enforced female sterilisation, legalised domestic violence, intimidation, harassment, violence, and stigma against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex people and various restrictions of freedoms of religion, of speech and press, of free association and assembly, I'm sure it's paradise on Earth.
Comments
This is painfully close
What is their floor? Do they have a floor any more?
@KevinASchofield
Kemi Badenoch on Adolescence: "It's based on a real story, but my understanding is that the boy who committed that crime was not white."
Adolescence creator Jack Thorne: "There is no part of this that’s based on a true story, not one single part.”
He'd have been better off saying specific rather than true.
You MUST come to Uzbekistan. It’s an incredible destination. There are direct flights to Tashkent from Heathrow
Once you are here you can see the remarkable essence of the country in a week, and in two weeks you could take in a bit of Kazakhstan or Kyrgyzstan
Bukhara and Samarkand are spellbinding. The Registan (main square) in Samarkand rivals St Marks in Venice as a purely beautiful public space
I cannot think of a rival
Can you identify the vegetables? *
https://www.bbc.co.uk/cbbc/quizzes/what-on-earth-is-that?collection=food-quizzes
I scored 4 out of 7.
( * It's not Geoffrey Howe, John Moore etc. These are real vegetables with zoomed in photos.)
This is PB. Imagine if we didn’t talk about polls because “it doesn’t matter”
IT ALWAYS MATTERS
I would expect, in a couple of years, that she will be transferred (Foreign Office?) and a new chancellor brought in as the spending brakes are released. It's a pretty obvious political strategy and may work, particularly in the context of a split right with neither Tories nor Reform looking notably credible as governments-in-waiting.
It's a grim poll for Labour but no need for panic just yet. And the local elections don't have that much potential to damage Labour, as the focus will be on the Tories and Reform.
No 4 is "To organise an event for the community or charity" !
They need to have a left of centre government that isn't ashamed of being left wing if they want left wing voters to turn out for them.
We may have helped a bit, but she got all the credit.
When you are at 21 and in third place and stupendously and historically unpopular (and still falling) and with no policies or plan for getting out of this mess, then yes, I think a soupçon of panic is justified
The key point may indeed be the elections in 2026 and whether Reform beat the Tories or not.
If things do broadly stay where they are, the next GE feels like it’s going to be tactical voting mad, and liable to throw up results way out of kilter with UNS. I would suspect the left would have the edge if it came to that, but that’s nothing more than a hunch.
Can you use your fluence, please, to get this sorted?
Well, yes, but as we see public opinion is so much more volatile than before. Party loyalties have broken down reducing the "floor" the parties can rely on.
Labour could get well and truly smashed but it isn't written in stone as it was for Sunak's Tories. They were doomed. Starmer could still recover.
And the "plan" is tough times now, but better times ahead of the election. So long as they look serious and responsible there's a chance particularly with a flailing opposition and someone like Farage dominating the airwaves, and the example of MAGA across the pond.
But which one will it be?
The truth is, Labour and especially Starmer, were never popular in Opposition it was just a case that the Tories became even more unpopular and the only alternative to a Con government was a Lab government.
But it was always obvious that once in power, Labour and Starmer woulds prove very unpopular. The implosion has been spectacular and very unusual in it's quickness, though.
I would imagine that Reform would be top of that list.
They may have come third in 2024 with 14.3% but their MPs could fit in an original Mini.
If she's referring to the Croydon case, she might just as well have said that her understanding was that the victim was not white.
Note what it says in item 9 about the portrayal of the victim. Those on here who have criticised what I've said about this should ask themselves how girls would respond to this portrayal. Or whether boys will respond in the way we would like them to.
I just don't think many of you get how invisible women of all ages feel they are - in the sense of not being seen as unambiguously at the centre of their own lives as opposed to a supporting character in others, how passively and negatively they are portrayed, how they are usually seen as people to whom something is done by men or those who must put matters right for others (usually men) or seen as bit parts in the lives of men, around which everything revolves.
As for @RochdalePioneers statement earlier - "What they need to learn the basics of [deleted] respect towards women. How many rights does a man have over a woman? Zero." - well I agree. But we are about to get the Supreme Court's judgment in the FWS case which will tell us whether women can even define who we are. If we can't even do that, the idea that men have or should have zero rights over a woman will be further away than ever.
She's got that one nailed down already. "Daddy daddy I need help !"
Some of the issue polling suggests that Conservative voters are closer to LD and Labour than they are Reform. If we're going to see tactical voting from Conservative voters, it might be in the other direction.
Of those who picked Reform UK as their top party, their second choice party was…
Con 54
LD 16
Grn 16
Lab 13
Of those who picked the Conservatives first…
Ref 40
LD 30
Lab 21
Grn 7
There’s no law that says “everyone must shuffle round until one party gets 40%+ of the vote”
The MAGA idea of the "deep state" is that it is an unelected bureacracy with its own hidden liberal agenda, and which works to undermine elected right-wing office-holders & stops these politicians from carrying out their conservative agenda.
Not only has the liberal Judge has been elected to her office, but she openly stated that she would be a liberal Judge.
Musk is now saying that spaffing $25m up the wall and getting spanked in Wisconsin was "losing a piece for positional gain"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrCORr8v4cs
Times Wireless reveals the flaw in Kemi's PMQs masterplan.
https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/en/2025/04/01/medical-student-convicted-of-raping-another-student-escapes-sent/
But time will tell, as ever.
Off to enjoy the glorious sunshine. Have a good afternoon, PB 👍
While his political opinions are a fairly long way to the right, he recognises the importance of equal access to the law in a liberal democracy.
And is acting accordingly here.
The right’s legal heavyweight takes on Trump
https://thehill.com/newsletters/the-gavel/5226754-trump-law-firms-legal-heavyweight/
President Trump has an unlikely foe in his efforts to target Big Law firms: Paul Clement.
Clement is a conservative legal heavyweight who served as solicitor general in President George W. Bush’s administration and has argued more than 100 cases before the Supreme Court. He has notched major conservative victories at the court, including expanding the Second Amendment, ending deference to federal agencies and enabling a high school football coach to pray on the field with students.
Now, Clement is taking on WilmerHale as a client as it sues the president over his executive order restricting the firm’s attorneys’ security clearances and access to federal buildings.
“The Order is not only a threat to WilmerHale, but inimical to our Nation’s constitutional order and the rule of law,” Clement wrote in court filings.
It’s an interesting position for Clement, who twice resigned from Big Law firms to keep representing conservative positions.
In 2011, Clement left King & Spalding when it withdrew from representing the House of Representatives in defending the Defense of Marriage Act. And years later, he resigned from Kirland & Ellis after it announced it would no longer handle cases implicating the Second Amendment. ..
No notes
https://bsky.app/profile/taniel.bsky.social/post/3llspak2axs2z
However much any of us are fed up with Starmer (and God knows we are) while his opposition is Farage and the Tories we have absolutely no alternative but to make sure Labour win.
Ideally that would be with the help of the Lib Dems and Greens but the first responsibility is to ensure Farage gets nowhere near
Perhaps you could once again ask the Mods to intervene.
Here is the answer.
https://insideevs.com/news/755234/hyundai-insteroid-ev-rally-concept/
I shall do an analysis of the judgment and its consequences. I shall be writing about what it means for women and their rights under the Equality Act since that is what the case is fundamentally about. So feel free to write about trans stuff. (Incidentally, a while back you wrote a comment about the issue of single sex loos and changing rooms in workplaces. What you wrote was not legally accurate. What the legal position is is set out here - https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2025/02/26/something-for-everyone/).
https://x.com/alexmassie/status/1907420499740701182
https://bsky.app/profile/dceiver.bsky.social/post/3llthxqaf3s2k
That John Gray has his fans on PB, chiefly Andy_JS, although there are others. I like reading him but by all in Heaven above he overwrites, and in TNL:TAL you can lose the middle section entirely. Seriously: I think he mashed together notes from two different books.
@faisalislam
Tesla shares slump in pre market after significant miss on car sales in Q1.
336,681 vehicles delivered, about 40,000 down on expectations, and 50k down or 13% down on Q1 last year…
However, when I read the comments here, including Ms Cyclefree's header article I'm motivated to think back EVER SO many years to my own youth. Fortunately or not I've quite a good memory and even at my advanced age, when I check it with facts or documents..... such as my diary ..... it's usually right. Or near enough.
And being 'dumped', especially by someone who you care about a great deal, and thought she cared about you hurts. And indeed, if she did, or said she did, up until, on reflection, shortly before the 'dumping', it hurts badly.
I still recall one such occasion and, when I told an acquaintance about it, he suggested he get a group together and we go out and find the 'new' couple and 'deal with them'. I don't know quite what he had in mind, and didn't accept his offer, but I often wondered what I would do if I did see them together and sometimes went looking.
On reflection I don't know what I'd have actually done had I found them, TBH, and perhaps it's better that I didn't.
Better to do what I did, which was try to find a replacement, which, after half a dozen or so false starts I did.
I have a collection of his essays (Grays Anatomy), and they are short, sharpy and to the point. Since he retired from the LSE, and/or he no longer has an editor, his essay length has grown and grown and grown.
He also has an irritating habit of saying the same thing three times. That is, he'll make a point, and then make exactly the same point. Because it's important to keep saying the same thing.
Still worth reading. But only just.
But if he can say his sex (as opposed to his gender) is female when it isn't and can never be, then I and every other woman are denied the right to have single sex spaces, services and associations. Indeed the current legal position in Scotland is that lesbians cannot meet in an association of more than 24 and keep men out. And, as the Scottish government made clear in its submissions to the Supreme Court last November, its position is that transwomen (ie men who claim to be women) are not women, unless they have a GRC ie TW are not women. So maybe direct your complaints to the Scottish government.