Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Look What You Made Me Do – politicalbetting.com

124

Comments

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 24,057
    sarissa said:

    Leon said:

    Memo to any PB travellers

    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.
    Enough about Trump's USA, time to move on.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,592

    July 2024 polling (so a bit out of date), https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50091-how-do-britons-rank-the-main-parties

    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

    So while over half of Reform voters are basically rightwing Conservatives, Conservative voters would split almost equally between Reform and LD if the party did not exist (with Reform getting a plurality of 2024 Conservatives but over half of 2024 Conservatives preferring the LDs and Labour to Reform).

    So it actually is probably best for the right to remain seperate parties between the Tories and Reform than unite, as they pick up more voters separate than they would combined. Indeed on many current polls the Tories and Reform combined have a majority even under FPTP but if they merged under Farage's leadership they would be unlikely to get such a majority especially as some Tories went LD
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 16,369

    DISCLAIMER: I haven't watched 'Adolescence.

    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.

    Yes nobody ever forgets getting dumped for the first time.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,158
    edited April 2
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting letter - https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/11bRIaC89byaiJiBdDZVig0Oq0rZUNdy_mLwlRvLErrA/mobilebasic

    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"?
    John Gray the author of "The New Leviathans: Thoughts After Liberalism" (2024), https://www.waterstones.com/book/the-new-leviathans/john-gray/9780141999432

    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.
    The point about John Gray is that he does overwrite, but he overwrites a lot less than nearly every other philosopher I've tried reading.

    I much prefer to watch or listen to him talking because he's much easier to listen to than read. For example this video where he talks about populism. I must have already watched it about 5 times because it's so interesting.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hC5nXXJrV8
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,120
    sarissa said:

    Leon said:

    Memo to any PB travellers

    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.
    They very nosy people with bone in their brain...
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400
    Scott_xP said:

    A senator is threatening to cancel Trumspki's Canadian state of emergency (posted earlier) and he is losing his shit

    https://x.com/alexmassie/status/1907420499740701182

    https://bsky.app/profile/dceiver.bsky.social/post/3llthxqaf3s2k

    I think they need 4 Republican Senators to support the resolution. 1 (Paul) is co-sponsoring it. Collins has been supportive, but sometimes flakes when it comes to votes. Grassley and Tillis seem undecided. As it stands, my guess is it won't pass. We'll see whether other Republican Senators' disquiet will lead to action.

    The resolution is unlikely to get through the House.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,080
    CatMan said:

    CatMan said:

    Sainsbury's was deserted today. People may be feeling the pinch.

    brexit benefit?

    :wink:
    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.
    I think the current US gyrations may well push CPTPP + UK + EU + Taiwan + others all together into a large free trade block.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,158
    edited April 2
    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting letter - https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/11bRIaC89byaiJiBdDZVig0Oq0rZUNdy_mLwlRvLErrA/mobilebasic

    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?
    A good example of hyper-liberalism at the moment in my opinion is the way the Sentencing Council decided to venture into political decision-making seemingly without realising they were doing anything controversial. It came as a total surprise to them to find both main political parties refusing to support them.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400
    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting letter - https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/11bRIaC89byaiJiBdDZVig0Oq0rZUNdy_mLwlRvLErrA/mobilebasic

    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"?
    John Gray the author of "The New Leviathans: Thoughts After Liberalism" (2024), https://www.waterstones.com/book/the-new-leviathans/john-gray/9780141999432

    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.
    That (disappointingly) would be the latter John Gray.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,080

    Scott_xP said:

    A senator is threatening to cancel Trumspki's Canadian state of emergency (posted earlier) and he is losing his shit

    https://x.com/alexmassie/status/1907420499740701182

    https://bsky.app/profile/dceiver.bsky.social/post/3llthxqaf3s2k

    I think they need 4 Republican Senators to support the resolution. 1 (Paul) is co-sponsoring it. Collins has been supportive, but sometimes flakes when it comes to votes. Grassley and Tillis seem undecided. As it stands, my guess is it won't pass. We'll see whether other Republican Senators' disquiet will lead to action.

    The resolution is unlikely to get through the House.
    It definitely won't get through the House of Representatives, as two Democratic seats are empty, Stefanik's confirmation was canned, and the Republicans won both Florida Special Elections.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,975
    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    Hopefully by the time of the next GE any politicians with direct or semi indirect links to Trump will be so toxic that their opportunity for Government will be vastly diminished SEDICIPM ( Sir Ed Davy is crap is PM).
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,920
    boulay said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting letter - https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/11bRIaC89byaiJiBdDZVig0Oq0rZUNdy_mLwlRvLErrA/mobilebasic

    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.
    Probably less intense than a PB trains argument.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,120

    boulay said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting letter - https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/11bRIaC89byaiJiBdDZVig0Oq0rZUNdy_mLwlRvLErrA/mobilebasic

    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.
    Probably less intense than a PB trains argument.
    We always end up asking, what's the points?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,489
    HYUFD said:

    July 2024 polling (so a bit out of date), https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50091-how-do-britons-rank-the-main-parties

    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

    So while over half of Reform voters are basically rightwing Conservatives, Conservative voters would split almost equally between Reform and LD if the party did not exist (with Reform getting a plurality of 2024 Conservatives but over half of 2024 Conservatives preferring the LDs and Labour to Reform).

    So it actually is probably best for the right to remain seperate parties between the Tories and Reform than unite, as they pick up more voters separate than they would combined. Indeed on many current polls the Tories and Reform combined have a majority even under FPTP but if they merged under Farage's leadership they would be unlikely to get such a majority especially as some Tories went LD
    What I've been saying.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400
    edited April 2
    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting letter - https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/11bRIaC89byaiJiBdDZVig0Oq0rZUNdy_mLwlRvLErrA/mobilebasic

    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.
    I presume a transgender son is saying his sex is male, and probably presents as male, but would be forced to use woman-only spaces and be banned from man-only ones.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,228
    Off topic: For the record, I was too optimistic about the Democrat winning the special election in Florida's 6th district. I thought he might have 1 chance in 10, but I recognize that 1 in 100 would have been more realistic.

    That said, yesterday was not a good day for Musk and Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/02/wisconsin-supreme-court-florida-election-takeaways/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida's_6th_congressional_district
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,245
    ydoethur said:

    boulay said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting letter - https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/11bRIaC89byaiJiBdDZVig0Oq0rZUNdy_mLwlRvLErrA/mobilebasic

    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.
    Probably less intense than a PB trains argument.
    We always end up asking, what's the points?
    Signals a platform for a permanent way ahead.....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,096
    Cyclefree said:

    Nigelb said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting letter - https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/11bRIaC89byaiJiBdDZVig0Oq0rZUNdy_mLwlRvLErrA/mobilebasic

    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.
    But which changing rooms should Nigelb's son use ?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,844
    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    The polls are remarkably stuck in a doldrums of Lab/Con/Ref all scoring twenty something, with veryu few polls outside the margin of error and the real figures, as far as they mean anythng, all being close together and as in Wiki's rolling chart.

    What is not easy to see is how any of the three can break away. SFAICS there are irremovable grounds for people disliking all of them. Lab, because they have done no magic and communicate terribly; Tories for reasons requiring no expansion, but added to by the continuing lack of calibre at the top; Reform because they are a toxic mixture of gormless, extreme, dangerous, factional and tainted by association with Trumpism.

    Following Sherlock's truism: 'Once you have eliminated the impossible....' etc then one conclusion arises as a possibility. At this distance from 2010-2015, the least tainted party by far is the LDs. Could the next year or two be their time in the sun. I have no sense or feeling this is the case; but I don't have any sense of possible rise about any of them.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657

    Off topic: For the record, I was too optimistic about the Democrat winning the special election in Florida's 6th district. I thought he might have 1 chance in 10, but I recognize that 1 in 100 would have been more realistic.

    That said, yesterday was not a good day for Musk and Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/02/wisconsin-supreme-court-florida-election-takeaways/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida's_6th_congressional_district

    Tis but a scratch...
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 3,228
    Thanks to Cyclefree for -- again -- tackling this difficult subject. In recent years I have come to believe that the largest problem for the US is the breakdown of families, and I see this discussion as touching on one part of that greater problem.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 54,245

    Off topic: For the record, I was too optimistic about the Democrat winning the special election in Florida's 6th district. I thought he might have 1 chance in 10, but I recognize that 1 in 100 would have been more realistic.

    That said, yesterday was not a good day for Musk and Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/02/wisconsin-supreme-court-florida-election-takeaways/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida's_6th_congressional_district

    Unusually for a Special ELection, the Dems actually underperformed the polling. So no reason to feel you got it wrong.

    But on that swing, there's a whole swathe of seats that fall November 2026. And a fair few special elections in the interim too.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    While PBers are busy discussing the end of Global Trade as we know it, they have once again missed the BIG political story

    @BBCScotlandNews

    Harvie to stand down as Scottish Green co-leader

    https://x.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/1907372795329187958
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,844
    Andy_JS said:

    viewcode said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    viewcode said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Interesting letter - https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/11bRIaC89byaiJiBdDZVig0Oq0rZUNdy_mLwlRvLErrA/mobilebasic

    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"?
    John Gray the author of "The New Leviathans: Thoughts After Liberalism" (2024), https://www.waterstones.com/book/the-new-leviathans/john-gray/9780141999432

    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.
    The point about John Gray is that he does overwrite, but he overwrites a lot less than nearly every other philosopher I've tried reading.

    I much prefer to watch or listen to him talking because he's much easier to listen to than read. For example this video where he talks about populism. I must have already watched it about 5 times because it's so interesting.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hC5nXXJrV8
    Gray is all right in small doses; but he is one of that vast tribe who turns what would make a decent long article into a book. Serious books with long words in them should be confined to that much much smaller group of people who have something to say with so much content that it a book.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 30,489
    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    The polls are remarkably stuck in a doldrums of Lab/Con/Ref all scoring twenty something, with veryu few polls outside the margin of error and the real figures, as far as they mean anythng, all being close together and as in Wiki's rolling chart.

    What is not easy to see is how any of the three can break away. SFAICS there are irremovable grounds for people disliking all of them. Lab, because they have done no magic and communicate terribly; Tories for reasons requiring no expansion, but added to by the continuing lack of calibre at the top; Reform because they are a toxic mixture of gormless, extreme, dangerous, factional and tainted by association with Trumpism.

    Following Sherlock's truism: 'Once you have eliminated the impossible....' etc then one conclusion arises as a possibility. At this distance from 2010-2015, the least tainted party by far is the LDs. Could the next year or two be their time in the sun. I have no sense or feeling this is the case; but I don't have any sense of possible rise about any of them.
    Let's be fair, the Lib Dems do not 'communicate terribly' they are a collection of noxious political opportunists who would sell their granny for a whiff of power and are wholly bought into the broken political consensus that has led the economy to the brink of bankruptcy and society to a rabble. They have nothing of value to say on the pressing issues of the day other than the highly dubious notion that 'we would do this better', an approach that the dawn of Starmer has already found to be empty and inadequate.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,592
    edited April 2

    Off topic: For the record, I was too optimistic about the Democrat winning the special election in Florida's 6th district. I thought he might have 1 chance in 10, but I recognize that 1 in 100 would have been more realistic.

    That said, yesterday was not a good day for Musk and Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/02/wisconsin-supreme-court-florida-election-takeaways/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida's_6th_congressional_district

    Unusually for a Special ELection, the Dems actually underperformed the polling. So no reason to feel you got it wrong.

    But on that swing, there's a whole swathe of seats that fall November 2026. And a fair few special elections in the interim too.
    Of course at the moment there is little real change from last November in US polling.

    The impact of Trump's announcement this evening on tariffs and whether that raises US prices more than increases US manufacturing jobs will most likely determine whether the Democrats clearly retake Congress in next year's midterms and the GOP hold the White House in 2028 or not
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,080

    Off topic: For the record, I was too optimistic about the Democrat winning the special election in Florida's 6th district. I thought he might have 1 chance in 10, but I recognize that 1 in 100 would have been more realistic.

    That said, yesterday was not a good day for Musk and Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/02/wisconsin-supreme-court-florida-election-takeaways/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida's_6th_congressional_district

    Unusually for a Special ELection, the Dems actually underperformed the polling. So no reason to feel you got it wrong.

    But on that swing, there's a whole swathe of seats that fall November 2026. And a fair few special elections in the interim too.
    Florida has also been the one big State that has swung hardest against the Dems.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400

    Thanks to Cyclefree for -- again -- tackling this difficult subject. In recent years I have come to believe that the largest problem for the US is the breakdown of families, and I see this discussion as touching on one part of that greater problem.

    Speaking of the breakdown of families, I think the largest problem for the US is a certain double divorcé, followed by a triple divorcé who has fathered multiple children out of wedlock.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 2,093

    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 best laugh I had at secondary school was a English class trip to watch Polanski's Macbeth. 1200 15 year old boys watching Francesca Annis sleepwalking in the nude and mishearing "Oh what a sigh is there" as "Oh what a size they are"(!)
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 4,437

    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    The polls are remarkably stuck in a doldrums of Lab/Con/Ref all scoring twenty something, with veryu few polls outside the margin of error and the real figures, as far as they mean anythng, all being close together and as in Wiki's rolling chart.

    What is not easy to see is how any of the three can break away. SFAICS there are irremovable grounds for people disliking all of them. Lab, because they have done no magic and communicate terribly; Tories for reasons requiring no expansion, but added to by the continuing lack of calibre at the top; Reform because they are a toxic mixture of gormless, extreme, dangerous, factional and tainted by association with Trumpism.

    Following Sherlock's truism: 'Once you have eliminated the impossible....' etc then one conclusion arises as a possibility. At this distance from 2010-2015, the least tainted party by far is the LDs. Could the next year or two be their time in the sun. I have no sense or feeling this is the case; but I don't have any sense of possible rise about any of them.
    Let's be fair, the Lib Dems do not 'communicate terribly' they are a collection of noxious political opportunists who would sell their granny for a whiff of power and are wholly bought into the broken political consensus that has led the economy to the brink of bankruptcy and society to a rabble. They have nothing of value to say on the pressing issues of the day other than the highly dubious notion that 'we would do this better', an approach that the dawn of Starmer has already found to be empty and inadequate.
    I stopped reading after the first 3 words as you immediately contradicted yourself and your prejudices came to the fore.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,080
    For anyone concerned about the intelligence of elected representatives, here's Lauren Boebert confusing Roger Stone and Oliver Stone

    https://bsky.app/profile/acyn.bsky.social/post/3llrowxfen224
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    rcs1000 said:

    For anyone concerned about the intelligence of elected representatives, here's Lauren Boebert confusing Roger Stone and Oliver Stone

    https://bsky.app/profile/acyn.bsky.social/post/3llrowxfen224

    Please enjoy this video of Marine Le Pen calling for "lifelong ineligibility" for elected officials convicted of "misappropriation of public funds".

    https://x.com/SophieP25397/status/1907195425448202420
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,158
    Polling average

    Lab 24.5%
    Ref 24.2%
    Con 22.9%
    LD 13.4%
    Grn 8.8%

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,417

    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    The polls are remarkably stuck in a doldrums of Lab/Con/Ref all scoring twenty something, with veryu few polls outside the margin of error and the real figures, as far as they mean anythng, all being close together and as in Wiki's rolling chart.

    What is not easy to see is how any of the three can break away. SFAICS there are irremovable grounds for people disliking all of them. Lab, because they have done no magic and communicate terribly; Tories for reasons requiring no expansion, but added to by the continuing lack of calibre at the top; Reform because they are a toxic mixture of gormless, extreme, dangerous, factional and tainted by association with Trumpism.

    Following Sherlock's truism: 'Once you have eliminated the impossible....' etc then one conclusion arises as a possibility. At this distance from 2010-2015, the least tainted party by far is the LDs. Could the next year or two be their time in the sun. I have no sense or feeling this is the case; but I don't have any sense of possible rise about any of them.
    Let's be fair, the Lib Dems do not 'communicate terribly' they are a collection of noxious political opportunists who would sell their granny for a whiff of power and are wholly bought into the broken political consensus that has led the economy to the brink of bankruptcy and society to a rabble. They have nothing of value to say on the pressing issues of the day other than the highly dubious notion that 'we would do this better', an approach that the dawn of Starmer has already found to be empty and inadequate.
    I stopped reading after the first 3 words as you immediately contradicted yourself and your prejudices came to the fore.
    To be more accurate you must have read the next ten or so words to confirm your prejudice.

    As a sometimes LibDem voter and indeed one-time activist the words 'tuition fees' do bring back very unpleasant memories, but it does look as though that provides a lesson learned.

    Unless the now unemployed Nick Clegg decides to throw his hat into the ring somewhere, of course.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,060
    rcs1000 said:

    For anyone concerned about the intelligence of elected representatives, here's Lauren Boebert confusing Roger Stone and Oliver Stone

    https://bsky.app/profile/acyn.bsky.social/post/3llrowxfen224

    Poor old Lauren, she does get confused easily, just 18 months ago, in a Denver cinema, she was accused of confusing her partner’s cock for a box of popcorn and was rummaging around for a while before she realised her mistake.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 24,057
    rcs1000 said:

    For anyone concerned about the intelligence of elected representatives, here's Lauren Boebert confusing Roger Stone and Oliver Stone

    https://bsky.app/profile/acyn.bsky.social/post/3llrowxfen224

    Not quite sure how anyone can make that mistake, after Oliver's infamous scene in Basic Instinct.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,969
    HYUFD said:

    July 2024 polling (so a bit out of date), https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/50091-how-do-britons-rank-the-main-parties

    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

    So while over half of Reform voters are basically rightwing Conservatives…
    Or, to look at it another way, 40% of Tory voters are basically right wing nutters…

    Which many of us kind of knew already.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,302
    The firm who acted for the Birmingham women charged 10% plus VAT on a No Win No Fee. basis

    They made £1.1 billion. Doesn't that give the law firm an awful lot of money?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 29,666
    Belgian client wants me to visit a couple of sites in a few weeks, meet their development team, eat some products. Have had a look at travel, and the fun begins
    Obvious route is KLM Aberdeen to Schiphol and then train to Ghent. Must be the end of the Dutch holidays as those few days are £no
    Alternative madness is easyJet to Gatwick, Eurostar to Brussels and connect to Ghent. Doable, but will take 24 hours on the way out needing an overnight. And despite a promo fare one way on E* its not cheap.
    So we're into the adventure route. I'm DRIVING. Eurotunnel is £125 return and I have free supercharging. I lose half a day only to additional travel on the way out. And will combine with other stuff on the way back.
    I am planning the various YouTube videos already. There's at least 3 to get out of this...
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,210

    vik said:

    Eabhal said:

    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.
    Alternatively Democrats are elected, Republicans are put in place through rigged gerrymandering, something the democrats would never do.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,975
    Reeves very tongue tied and unconvincing in front of the Select Committee.

    I know he dropped a bollock last week but is it time for Darren Jones to replace her?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,975
    Andy_JS said:
    Expect a big jump in Reform support now Nige has a tattoo.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400
    Taz said:

    vik said:

    Eabhal said:

    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.
    Alternatively Democrats are elected, Republicans are put in place through rigged gerrymandering, something the democrats would never do.
    Right at the moment, Taz, who do you think is playing fast and loose with the rules more, do you think?
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,920
    HYUFD said:

    Off topic: For the record, I was too optimistic about the Democrat winning the special election in Florida's 6th district. I thought he might have 1 chance in 10, but I recognize that 1 in 100 would have been more realistic.

    That said, yesterday was not a good day for Musk and Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/02/wisconsin-supreme-court-florida-election-takeaways/

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida's_6th_congressional_district

    Unusually for a Special ELection, the Dems actually underperformed the polling. So no reason to feel you got it wrong.

    But on that swing, there's a whole swathe of seats that fall November 2026. And a fair few special elections in the interim too.
    Of course at the moment there is little real change from last November in US polling.

    The impact of Trump's announcement this evening on tariffs and whether that raises US prices more than increases US manufacturing jobs will most likely determine whether the Democrats clearly retake Congress in next year's midterms and the GOP hold the White House in 2028 or not
    The fears of any Latino with a tattoo may have an effect as well.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    Just how nervous is billionaire Elon Musk about allegations that he may be violating the state's bribery statute by paying people to vote?

    On Tuesday, Musk's super PAC, America PAC, pulled a video from X featuring $1 million giveaway winner Ekaterina Deistler in which she said she received the money, in part, to "vote." X is owned by the tech billionaire.

    "My name’s Ekaterina Deistler," she said in a video posted Monday morning. "I did exactly what Elon Musk told everyone to do: sign the petition, refer friends and family, vote, and now I have a million dollars."

    But the video was taken down yesterday, and America PAC posted a new video of Deistler on X on Tuesday afternoon.

    https://eu.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2025/04/01/elon-musk-group-removes-video-of-1m-winner-under-bribery-concerns/82766242007/
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,210

    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    The polls are remarkably stuck in a doldrums of Lab/Con/Ref all scoring twenty something, with veryu few polls outside the margin of error and the real figures, as far as they mean anythng, all being close together and as in Wiki's rolling chart.

    What is not easy to see is how any of the three can break away. SFAICS there are irremovable grounds for people disliking all of them. Lab, because they have done no magic and communicate terribly; Tories for reasons requiring no expansion, but added to by the continuing lack of calibre at the top; Reform because they are a toxic mixture of gormless, extreme, dangerous, factional and tainted by association with Trumpism.

    Following Sherlock's truism: 'Once you have eliminated the impossible....' etc then one conclusion arises as a possibility. At this distance from 2010-2015, the least tainted party by far is the LDs. Could the next year or two be their time in the sun. I have no sense or feeling this is the case; but I don't have any sense of possible rise about any of them.
    Let's be fair, the Lib Dems do not 'communicate terribly' they are a collection of noxious political opportunists who would sell their granny for a whiff of power and are wholly bought into the broken political consensus that has led the economy to the brink of bankruptcy and society to a rabble. They have nothing of value to say on the pressing issues of the day other than the highly dubious notion that 'we would do this better', an approach that the dawn of Starmer has already found to be empty and inadequate.
    I stopped reading after the first 3 words as you immediately contradicted yourself and your prejudices came to the fore.
    If you stopped after the first three words how would you know ?

    I thought it a withering, but accurate, critique of the Lib Dems.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,975
    boulay said:

    rcs1000 said:

    For anyone concerned about the intelligence of elected representatives, here's Lauren Boebert confusing Roger Stone and Oliver Stone

    https://bsky.app/profile/acyn.bsky.social/post/3llrowxfen224

    Poor old Lauren, she does get confused easily, just 18 months ago, in a Denver cinema, she was accused of confusing her partner’s cock for a box of popcorn and was rummaging around for a while before she realised her mistake.
    Didn't Melania make a similar mistake when she thought she was putting her hand in a bag of mini coconut mushrooms?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,417
    Scott_xP said:

    Just how nervous is billionaire Elon Musk about allegations that he may be violating the state's bribery statute by paying people to vote?

    On Tuesday, Musk's super PAC, America PAC, pulled a video from X featuring $1 million giveaway winner Ekaterina Deistler in which she said she received the money, in part, to "vote." X is owned by the tech billionaire.

    "My name’s Ekaterina Deistler," she said in a video posted Monday morning. "I did exactly what Elon Musk told everyone to do: sign the petition, refer friends and family, vote, and now I have a million dollars."

    But the video was taken down yesterday, and America PAC posted a new video of Deistler on X on Tuesday afternoon.

    https://eu.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/elections/2025/04/01/elon-musk-group-removes-video-of-1m-winner-under-bribery-concerns/82766242007/

    How does Musk know that...... if ...... she voted Republican? They still have a secret ballot in the USA, don't they? Or has that gone, too?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,080
    Roger said:

    The firm who acted for the Birmingham women charged 10% plus VAT on a No Win No Fee. basis

    They made £1.1 billion. Doesn't that give the law firm an awful lot of money?

    A while back, I saw a list of the 1,000 richest Americans. A shockingly large number of them were tobacco lawyers, who had brought class action lawsuits where they took 30% of the money (plus expenses). It meant that when Philip Morris and co settled for tens of billions of dollars, these lawyers picked up... checks... tens of billions of dollars.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 30,975
    Taz said:

    vik said:

    Eabhal said:

    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.
    Alternatively Democrats are elected, Republicans are put in place through rigged gerrymandering, something the democrats would never do.
    The Dems have had their fingers in the gerrymandering and cheating till over the post war period. The corruption of Joe Kennedy was the stuff of legends. However, none of this compares in the slightest to what is going on now. We are looking at Putin levels of domestic and international corruption.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,866
    rcs1000 said:

    Roger said:

    The firm who acted for the Birmingham women charged 10% plus VAT on a No Win No Fee. basis

    They made £1.1 billion. Doesn't that give the law firm an awful lot of money?

    A while back, I saw a list of the 1,000 richest Americans. A shockingly large number of them were tobacco lawyers, who had brought class action lawsuits where they took 30% of the money (plus expenses). It meant that when Philip Morris and co settled for tens of billions of dollars, these lawyers picked up... checks... tens of billions of dollars.
    The same lawyers got very very upset over the Sackler settlement being struck down.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,210
    Roger said:

    The firm who acted for the Birmingham women charged 10% plus VAT on a No Win No Fee. basis

    They made £1.1 billion. Doesn't that give the law firm an awful lot of money?

    Hence the slew of further cases and more in the pipeline. Didn’t the last shower change the law so you could claim back 6 years hence the law fare.

    Point of order, it was not the Birmingham Women, it was workers in different jobs a court has decided are the same value. Most will be women but not all. Same with the Next and Tesco cases among others.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,210

    Taz said:

    vik said:

    Eabhal said:

    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.
    Alternatively Democrats are elected, Republicans are put in place through rigged gerrymandering, something the democrats would never do.
    Right at the moment, Taz, who do you think is playing fast and loose with the rules more, do you think?
    As always, it’s the one in power.

    I’d rather neither side did it rather than turn a blind eye to the side one supports.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,210

    Taz said:

    vik said:

    Eabhal said:

    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.
    Alternatively Democrats are elected, Republicans are put in place through rigged gerrymandering, something the democrats would never do.
    The Dems have had their fingers in the gerrymandering and cheating till over the post war period. The corruption of Joe Kennedy was the stuff of legends. However, none of this compares in the slightest to what is going on now. We are looking at Putin levels of domestic and international corruption.
    ‘The post war period’

    Presumably the Iraq war.

    https://www.vox.com/22961590/redistricting-gerrymandering-house-2022-midterms
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,920

    Andy_JS said:
    Expect a big jump in Reform support now Nige has a tattoo.
    But he won't be travelling to the USA any more in case he gets sent to El Salvador.
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,210
    Tariff announcement will be after the markets close in the USA.

    Brace, Brace

    It does look like our govt are doing their very best on these.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,440
    Is it a bit odd that the police shot a man dead in Milton Keynes yesterday but the news has vanished from the front pages faster than you can say 'nothing to see here, guv'?
    No idea what led to this, no suggestion of anything, just rather odd that the police shooting someone isn't a bigger news story.
  • And here we go again. Labour is finished.

    Let’s talk again in 2029.
  • CJtheOptimistCJtheOptimist Posts: 308

    Is it a bit odd that the police shot a man dead in Milton Keynes yesterday but the news has vanished from the front pages faster than you can say 'nothing to see here, guv'?
    No idea what led to this, no suggestion of anything, just rather odd that the police shooting someone isn't a bigger news story.

    Thanks for highlighting this, I hadn't even heard about it! Yes, it is a bit odd.

    After googling, I see the event was reported on quite a number of websites yesterday, but as you say, nothing at all since. Strange. I wouldn't like to think this sort of thing became commonplace and didn't merit much reporting.

  • Is it a bit odd that the police shot a man dead in Milton Keynes yesterday but the news has vanished from the front pages faster than you can say 'nothing to see here, guv'?
    No idea what led to this, no suggestion of anything, just rather odd that the police shooting someone isn't a bigger news story.

    Not that odd. The pretty clear implication is that it was suicide by cop - someone rushing armed police brandishing a knife.

    It's automatically been referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, meaning the Police themselves can't comment in any detail. Of course, if an enterprising journalist comes up with evidence that this was something different, or IOPC don't accept the official explanation, then that might reignite the story. But, on the face of it, this does look like a very possibly mentally unwell person who posed an immediate danger and was shot by a response unit.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,080
    Taz said:

    Tariff announcement will be after the markets close in the USA.

    Brace, Brace

    It does look like our govt are doing their very best on these.

    Allegedly an across the board 15% tariff.

    The interesting question is whether it includes services or not.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    Oh

    @TheStalwart

    stocks are shooting higher after that headline about Trump saying Musk would be gone from the admin soon

    https://x.com/TheStalwart/status/1907454390052487550
  • Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    The polls are remarkably stuck in a doldrums of Lab/Con/Ref all scoring twenty something, with veryu few polls outside the margin of error and the real figures, as far as they mean anythng, all being close together and as in Wiki's rolling chart.

    What is not easy to see is how any of the three can break away. SFAICS there are irremovable grounds for people disliking all of them. Lab, because they have done no magic and communicate terribly; Tories for reasons requiring no expansion, but added to by the continuing lack of calibre at the top; Reform because they are a toxic mixture of gormless, extreme, dangerous, factional and tainted by association with Trumpism.

    Following Sherlock's truism: 'Once you have eliminated the impossible....' etc then one conclusion arises as a possibility. At this distance from 2010-2015, the least tainted party by far is the LDs. Could the next year or two be their time in the sun. I have no sense or feeling this is the case; but I don't have any sense of possible rise about any of them.
    Let's be fair, the Lib Dems do not 'communicate terribly' they are a collection of noxious political opportunists who would sell their granny for a whiff of power and are wholly bought into the broken political consensus that has led the economy to the brink of bankruptcy and society to a rabble. They have nothing of value to say on the pressing issues of the day other than the highly dubious notion that 'we would do this better', an approach that the dawn of Starmer has already found to be empty and inadequate.
    I stopped reading after the first 3 words as you immediately contradicted yourself and your prejudices came to the fore.
    If you stopped after the first three words how would you know ?

    I thought it a withering, but accurate, critique of the Lib Dems.
    It may be wishful thinking on my part but as Labour becomes increasingly loathed then the LD vote should also fall. Contrary to what they give out, around here they might be different from Labour but only in the same way as the Provos were different from the IRA
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 18,440

    Is it a bit odd that the police shot a man dead in Milton Keynes yesterday but the news has vanished from the front pages faster than you can say 'nothing to see here, guv'?
    No idea what led to this, no suggestion of anything, just rather odd that the police shooting someone isn't a bigger news story.

    Not that odd. The pretty clear implication is that it was suicide by cop - someone rushing armed police brandishing a knife.

    It's automatically been referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, meaning the Police themselves can't comment in any detail. Of course, if an enterprising journalist comes up with evidence that this was something different, or IOPC don't accept the official explanation, then that might reignite the story. But, on the face of it, this does look like a very possibly mentally unwell person who posed an immediate danger and was shot by a response unit.
    Why not tazer rather than bullet? Initial reports suggested he was 'armed'. Is it possible the call was that he was armed, so armed police responded and thus he was shot with a gun not a tazer? All a bit odd.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,080
    Ignoring the "Democrats are awesome, yay!" line, this is an excellent piece on the Trump tariff strategy from Paul Krugman:

    https://substack.com/home/post/p-160404589?source=queue

  • TazTaz Posts: 17,210
    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    Tariff announcement will be after the markets close in the USA.

    Brace, Brace

    It does look like our govt are doing their very best on these.

    Allegedly an across the board 15% tariff.

    The interesting question is whether it includes services or not.
    BBC News are going with a 20% across the board tariffs on goods on the Business Today segment currently airing.

    No mention at all of services and a major concern as to the impact on Northern Ireland.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,592

    Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    The polls are remarkably stuck in a doldrums of Lab/Con/Ref all scoring twenty something, with veryu few polls outside the margin of error and the real figures, as far as they mean anythng, all being close together and as in Wiki's rolling chart.

    What is not easy to see is how any of the three can break away. SFAICS there are irremovable grounds for people disliking all of them. Lab, because they have done no magic and communicate terribly; Tories for reasons requiring no expansion, but added to by the continuing lack of calibre at the top; Reform because they are a toxic mixture of gormless, extreme, dangerous, factional and tainted by association with Trumpism.

    Following Sherlock's truism: 'Once you have eliminated the impossible....' etc then one conclusion arises as a possibility. At this distance from 2010-2015, the least tainted party by far is the LDs. Could the next year or two be their time in the sun. I have no sense or feeling this is the case; but I don't have any sense of possible rise about any of them.
    Let's be fair, the Lib Dems do not 'communicate terribly' they are a collection of noxious political opportunists who would sell their granny for a whiff of power and are wholly bought into the broken political consensus that has led the economy to the brink of bankruptcy and society to a rabble. They have nothing of value to say on the pressing issues of the day other than the highly dubious notion that 'we would do this better', an approach that the dawn of Starmer has already found to be empty and inadequate.
    I stopped reading after the first 3 words as you immediately contradicted yourself and your prejudices came to the fore.
    If you stopped after the first three words how would you know ?

    I thought it a withering, but accurate, critique of the Lib Dems.
    It may be wishful thinking on my part but as Labour becomes increasingly loathed then the LD vote should also fall. Contrary to what they give out, around here they might be different from Labour but only in the same way as the Provos were different from the IRA
    If Labour are re elected it will almost certainly only be as a minority government with LD confidence and supply, at which point the LDs would likely rapidly decline in the polls as they did when they last supported the government
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 34,158
    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,592
    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    Tariff announcement will be after the markets close in the USA.

    Brace, Brace

    It does look like our govt are doing their very best on these.

    Allegedly an across the board 15% tariff.

    The interesting question is whether it includes services or not.
    BBC News are going with a 20% across the board tariffs on goods on the Business Today segment currently airing.

    No mention at all of services and a major concern as to the impact on Northern Ireland.
    I doubt it has much impact at all on NI peace process, only exporters who export a lot to the US but that will be the same the world over from tonight
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,120
    Andy_JS said:

    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?

    That is a random question.

    Sounds bit of a daredevil stunt to fly on it rather than in it.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,983

    Is it a bit odd that the police shot a man dead in Milton Keynes yesterday but the news has vanished from the front pages faster than you can say 'nothing to see here, guv'?
    No idea what led to this, no suggestion of anything, just rather odd that the police shooting someone isn't a bigger news story.

    Not that odd. The pretty clear implication is that it was suicide by cop - someone rushing armed police brandishing a knife.

    It's automatically been referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, meaning the Police themselves can't comment in any detail. Of course, if an enterprising journalist comes up with evidence that this was something different, or IOPC don't accept the official explanation, then that might reignite the story. But, on the face of it, this does look like a very possibly mentally unwell person who posed an immediate danger and was shot by a response unit.
    Why not tazer rather than bullet? Initial reports suggested he was 'armed'. Is it possible the call was that he was armed, so armed police responded and thus he was shot with a gun not a tazer? All a bit odd.
    They don't always work. Armed cops will only use a taser when they are covered by another officer with a firearm. A man with a knife can run three car lengths before you can zap them.*

    *This is very out of date information, obtained while drunk at a wedding.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,492
    Scott_xP said:

    While PBers are busy discussing the end of Global Trade as we know it, they have once again missed the BIG political story

    @BBCScotlandNews

    Harvie to stand down as Scottish Green co-leader

    https://x.com/BBCScotlandNews/status/1907372795329187958

    The man who, with his colleague Lorna Slater, have done their best to end Scottish trade, through their damage to Scottish business.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,592
    Andy_JS said:

    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?

    Leon, he had a post a week or 2 back about some maiden voyage with Champers and Celebs no surprise
  • TazTaz Posts: 17,210
    edited April 2
    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    Tariff announcement will be after the markets close in the USA.

    Brace, Brace

    It does look like our govt are doing their very best on these.

    Allegedly an across the board 15% tariff.

    The interesting question is whether it includes services or not.
    BBC News are going with a 20% across the board tariffs on goods on the Business Today segment currently airing.

    No mention at all of services and a major concern as to the impact on Northern Ireland.
    I doubt it has much impact at all on NI peace process, only exporters who export a lot to the US but that will be the same the world over from tonight
    Not the peace process, the tariffs the US are applying due to the Windsor Framework.

    That was the concern. We may end up with more punitive tariffs.

    We will know soon enough.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,417
    ydoethur said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?

    That is a random question.

    Sounds bit of a daredevil stunt to fly on it rather than in it.
    My elder son was bumped up onto it once. New York > London. Said the sunrise was amazing.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,155
    Andy_JS said:

    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?

    Friend of mine did, back in the day. She said you couldn't hear yourself think for the noise.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,080
    Andy_JS said:

    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?

    I flew on it once: soon after they announced its retirement, BA did a big promotion, with some amazing fares, and I flew back from NYC to London.

    What was most amazing was that it only took about two hours to get to the coast of Ireland from New York, at which point they basically shut off the engines and glided in.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 59,080

    Andy_JS said:

    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?

    Friend of mine did, back in the day. She said you couldn't hear yourself think for the noise.
    It was loud, but not insane: being at the back of a BAC 1-11 was much worse.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,127
    Eabhal said:

    Is it a bit odd that the police shot a man dead in Milton Keynes yesterday but the news has vanished from the front pages faster than you can say 'nothing to see here, guv'?
    No idea what led to this, no suggestion of anything, just rather odd that the police shooting someone isn't a bigger news story.

    Not that odd. The pretty clear implication is that it was suicide by cop - someone rushing armed police brandishing a knife.

    It's automatically been referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, meaning the Police themselves can't comment in any detail. Of course, if an enterprising journalist comes up with evidence that this was something different, or IOPC don't accept the official explanation, then that might reignite the story. But, on the face of it, this does look like a very possibly mentally unwell person who posed an immediate danger and was shot by a response unit.
    Why not tazer rather than bullet? Initial reports suggested he was 'armed'. Is it possible the call was that he was armed, so armed police responded and thus he was shot with a gun not a tazer? All a bit odd.
    They don't always work. Armed cops will only use a taser when they are covered by another officer with a firearm. A man with a knife can run three car lengths before you can zap them.*

    *This is very out of date information, obtained while drunk at a wedding.
    I occasionally refer to a brilliant book by Ben Ando: "Beyond the Call of Duty", about police bravery. A couple of the incidents detail occasions where multiple attempts to use a Taser had zero effect on the target: once because he was wearing thick clothing, and the other because he was very high on something (and a can of mace or somesuch sprayed directly into his eyes also had no effect).

    A big takeaway from that book is how quickly things can go awry in a situation, and how it is easy to spend hours or days dissecting a decision that had to be made in seconds, if that. Training helps massively, but each situation is unique.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/Beyond-Call-Duty-Britains-Officers/dp/1472108329
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,120

    ydoethur said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?

    That is a random question.

    Sounds bit of a daredevil stunt to fly on it rather than in it.
    My elder son was bumped up onto it once. New York > London. Said the sunrise was amazing.
    I bet it was, but the wind must have been something else.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    Did Musk just get DOGEd?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,417
    I haven't watched Adolescence, nor do I have a Netflix sub :lol:
  • Eabhal said:

    Is it a bit odd that the police shot a man dead in Milton Keynes yesterday but the news has vanished from the front pages faster than you can say 'nothing to see here, guv'?
    No idea what led to this, no suggestion of anything, just rather odd that the police shooting someone isn't a bigger news story.

    Not that odd. The pretty clear implication is that it was suicide by cop - someone rushing armed police brandishing a knife.

    It's automatically been referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, meaning the Police themselves can't comment in any detail. Of course, if an enterprising journalist comes up with evidence that this was something different, or IOPC don't accept the official explanation, then that might reignite the story. But, on the face of it, this does look like a very possibly mentally unwell person who posed an immediate danger and was shot by a response unit.
    Why not tazer rather than bullet? Initial reports suggested he was 'armed'. Is it possible the call was that he was armed, so armed police responded and thus he was shot with a gun not a tazer? All a bit odd.
    They don't always work. Armed cops will only use a taser when they are covered by another officer with a firearm. A man with a knife can run three car lengths before you can zap them.*

    *This is very out of date information, obtained while drunk at a wedding.
    I think Raylan Givens busted the 21 feet myth.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400
    .
    HYUFD said:

    Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    The polls are remarkably stuck in a doldrums of Lab/Con/Ref all scoring twenty something, with veryu few polls outside the margin of error and the real figures, as far as they mean anythng, all being close together and as in Wiki's rolling chart.

    What is not easy to see is how any of the three can break away. SFAICS there are irremovable grounds for people disliking all of them. Lab, because they have done no magic and communicate terribly; Tories for reasons requiring no expansion, but added to by the continuing lack of calibre at the top; Reform because they are a toxic mixture of gormless, extreme, dangerous, factional and tainted by association with Trumpism.

    Following Sherlock's truism: 'Once you have eliminated the impossible....' etc then one conclusion arises as a possibility. At this distance from 2010-2015, the least tainted party by far is the LDs. Could the next year or two be their time in the sun. I have no sense or feeling this is the case; but I don't have any sense of possible rise about any of them.
    Let's be fair, the Lib Dems do not 'communicate terribly' they are a collection of noxious political opportunists who would sell their granny for a whiff of power and are wholly bought into the broken political consensus that has led the economy to the brink of bankruptcy and society to a rabble. They have nothing of value to say on the pressing issues of the day other than the highly dubious notion that 'we would do this better', an approach that the dawn of Starmer has already found to be empty and inadequate.
    I stopped reading after the first 3 words as you immediately contradicted yourself and your prejudices came to the fore.
    If you stopped after the first three words how would you know ?

    I thought it a withering, but accurate, critique of the Lib Dems.
    It may be wishful thinking on my part but as Labour becomes increasingly loathed then the LD vote should also fall. Contrary to what they give out, around here they might be different from Labour but only in the same way as the Provos were different from the IRA
    If Labour are re elected it will almost certainly only be as a minority government with LD confidence and supply, at which point the LDs would likely rapidly decline in the polls as they did when they last supported the government
    We’ve got 4 years to go!!! Nothing is almost certain.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 45,127
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?

    Friend of mine did, back in the day. She said you couldn't hear yourself think for the noise.
    It was loud, but not insane: being at the back of a BAC 1-11 was much worse.
    Whereas the TU-144 (Konkordski) was incredibly loud - on the order of 90 to 95 dB throughout the flight. You could apparently hardly talk to the person in the seat next to you. Rock concerts are generally above 90dB.

    (Remember that decibels are logarithmic, not linear. So a 10dB sound increase is ten times louder.)
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 53,866

    Eabhal said:

    Is it a bit odd that the police shot a man dead in Milton Keynes yesterday but the news has vanished from the front pages faster than you can say 'nothing to see here, guv'?
    No idea what led to this, no suggestion of anything, just rather odd that the police shooting someone isn't a bigger news story.

    Not that odd. The pretty clear implication is that it was suicide by cop - someone rushing armed police brandishing a knife.

    It's automatically been referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, meaning the Police themselves can't comment in any detail. Of course, if an enterprising journalist comes up with evidence that this was something different, or IOPC don't accept the official explanation, then that might reignite the story. But, on the face of it, this does look like a very possibly mentally unwell person who posed an immediate danger and was shot by a response unit.
    Why not tazer rather than bullet? Initial reports suggested he was 'armed'. Is it possible the call was that he was armed, so armed police responded and thus he was shot with a gun not a tazer? All a bit odd.
    They don't always work. Armed cops will only use a taser when they are covered by another officer with a firearm. A man with a knife can run three car lengths before you can zap them.*

    *This is very out of date information, obtained while drunk at a wedding.
    I think Raylan Givens busted the 21 feet myth.
    The guy tripped and stabbed himself to death, IIRC…
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657
    @alaynatreene

    Mark Zuckerberg just walked into the West Wing ...
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,400
    rcs1000 said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Random question: did any PBers fly on Concorde?

    Friend of mine did, back in the day. She said you couldn't hear yourself think for the noise.
    It was loud, but not insane: being at the back of a BAC 1-11 was much worse.
    Being in an RAF Chipmunk was deafening.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 14,719
    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    Tariff announcement will be after the markets close in the USA.

    Brace, Brace

    It does look like our govt are doing their very best on these.

    Allegedly an across the board 15% tariff.

    The interesting question is whether it includes services or not.
    Reminder: you can’t charge customs duty (aka tariffs) on services because they are not goods that need to clear customs.

    They can do various other things on services, in the field of corporate tax. As indeed they already have. The BEAT and FDII regimes are essentially protectionist US measures on services.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 53,417

    algarkirk said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Post spring statement @Moreincommon_ VI sees Labour fall to our lowest score for them at 21%. Tories at 26% lead Reform by 1.

    🌳 CON 26% (+1)
    ➡️ REF UK 25% (+1)
    🌹 LAB 21% (-3)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (+1)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-3)
    🟡 SNP 2% (-1)

    N =2,081 | Dates: 28 - 31/3 | Change w 24/3

    https://x.com/luketryl/status/1907323946090872979

    Maybe it really will be Kemi PM and Nigel deputy PM.
    The polls are remarkably stuck in a doldrums of Lab/Con/Ref all scoring twenty something, with veryu few polls outside the margin of error and the real figures, as far as they mean anythng, all being close together and as in Wiki's rolling chart.

    What is not easy to see is how any of the three can break away. SFAICS there are irremovable grounds for people disliking all of them. Lab, because they have done no magic and communicate terribly; Tories for reasons requiring no expansion, but added to by the continuing lack of calibre at the top; Reform because they are a toxic mixture of gormless, extreme, dangerous, factional and tainted by association with Trumpism.

    Following Sherlock's truism: 'Once you have eliminated the impossible....' etc then one conclusion arises as a possibility. At this distance from 2010-2015, the least tainted party by far is the LDs. Could the next year or two be their time in the sun. I have no sense or feeling this is the case; but I don't have any sense of possible rise about any of them.
    Let's be fair, the Lib Dems do not 'communicate terribly' they are a collection of noxious political opportunists who would sell their granny for a whiff of power and are wholly bought into the broken political consensus that has led the economy to the brink of bankruptcy and society to a rabble. They have nothing of value to say on the pressing issues of the day other than the highly dubious notion that 'we would do this better', an approach that the dawn of Starmer has already found to be empty and inadequate.
    "The Lib Dems are not just empty. They are a void within a vacuum surrounded by a vast inanition."
    - Boris Johnson, 2003.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 73,120
    TimS said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Taz said:

    Tariff announcement will be after the markets close in the USA.

    Brace, Brace

    It does look like our govt are doing their very best on these.

    Allegedly an across the board 15% tariff.

    The interesting question is whether it includes services or not.
    Reminder: you can’t charge customs duty (aka tariffs) on services because they are not goods that need to clear customs.
    You think that will stop Trump trying? I mean, seriously...
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 65,155
    Scott_xP said:

    @alaynatreene

    Mark Zuckerberg just walked into the West Wing ...

    DOGE's new boss?
  • Eabhal said:

    Is it a bit odd that the police shot a man dead in Milton Keynes yesterday but the news has vanished from the front pages faster than you can say 'nothing to see here, guv'?
    No idea what led to this, no suggestion of anything, just rather odd that the police shooting someone isn't a bigger news story.

    Not that odd. The pretty clear implication is that it was suicide by cop - someone rushing armed police brandishing a knife.

    It's automatically been referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, meaning the Police themselves can't comment in any detail. Of course, if an enterprising journalist comes up with evidence that this was something different, or IOPC don't accept the official explanation, then that might reignite the story. But, on the face of it, this does look like a very possibly mentally unwell person who posed an immediate danger and was shot by a response unit.
    Why not tazer rather than bullet? Initial reports suggested he was 'armed'. Is it possible the call was that he was armed, so armed police responded and thus he was shot with a gun not a tazer? All a bit odd.
    They don't always work. Armed cops will only use a taser when they are covered by another officer with a firearm. A man with a knife can run three car lengths before you can zap them.*

    *This is very out of date information, obtained while drunk at a wedding.
    I think Raylan Givens busted the 21 feet myth.
    The guy tripped and stabbed himself to death, IIRC…
    Ah, yes, you're right. Danny Crowe stabbed himself through the chin!
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657

    Scott_xP said:

    @alaynatreene

    Mark Zuckerberg just walked into the West Wing ...

    DOGE's new boss?
    https://bsky.app/profile/atrupar.com/post/3lltrqr3xp227

    ...
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 29,849
    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    A senator is threatening to cancel Trumspki's Canadian state of emergency (posted earlier) and he is losing his shit

    https://x.com/alexmassie/status/1907420499740701182

    https://bsky.app/profile/dceiver.bsky.social/post/3llthxqaf3s2k

    This is your regular reminder that almost no fentanyl is smuggled from Canada into the US.
    Of course not. If it were smuggled, how would Trump apply a tariff to fentanyl sales?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,657

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    A senator is threatening to cancel Trumspki's Canadian state of emergency (posted earlier) and he is losing his shit

    https://x.com/alexmassie/status/1907420499740701182

    https://bsky.app/profile/dceiver.bsky.social/post/3llthxqaf3s2k

    This is your regular reminder that almost no fentanyl is smuggled from Canada into the US.
    Of course not. If it were smuggled, how would Trump apply a tariff to fentanyl sales?
    Is it more worrying that he doesn't understand tariffs, or that he doesn't understand drug smuggling?
Sign In or Register to comment.