Skip to content

It’s a bold strategy, let’s see if it pays off for Farage – politicalbetting.com

13»

Comments

  • scampi25scampi25 Posts: 319
    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    Rees-Mogg named his 6th child Sixtus, so I think Bart can name a child Eleven.
    Is everyone missing the point, or just playing this straight ?
    Well I assumed he'd mistyped Evelyn.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,152

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 7,604

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    He's 8th in line. He's never going to become King. It's a completely academic point.
    Indeed. He was fourth, before the last constitutional change ending primogeniture.
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 10,539
    edited October 31

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    If Andy was removed would that mean Beatrice would ascend to the throne if he didn't? Does Andy's removal cut her out in other words?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 20,957
    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    And numbers One through Ten, don’t forget them…
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 53,811

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    Isnt it established principle that such a decision rests with the King?

  • Foxy said:

    Could I just hat tip @TSE for the header headline.

    As I remember the film, Average Joes strategy did see off GloboGym.

    In part down to dubious betting.

    Congratulations for spotting my subtle Dodgeball reference in the headline.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 40,731
    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 62,152
    edited October 31
    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 40,731
    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
    Why would it need to be signed? Are you going to have less than zero kids?
  • viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    Rees-Mogg named his 6th child Sixtus, so I think Bart can name a child Eleven.
    Is everyone missing the point, or just playing this straight ?
    I am aware that there is a character in "Stranger Things" that is called "Eleven". However her clothing is not such that would constitute a Halloween costume. So unless Barty had shaved her head, there was no reason to call his child "Eleven" unless that was actually their name. Hence my question.
    She chose who she wanted to be herself, she chose the iconic jumpsuit that Eleven wore in season 3 and used make-up to give herself a nose bleed.

    https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/625648573222597512/
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,767
    Note that the program has a several billion dollar reserve to cover this kind of eventuality.

    It is the administration's choice to suspend food aid.

    Reuters: US JUDGE RULES TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S PLAN TO SUSPEND SNAP FOOD AID BENEFITS DURING SHUTDOWN IS LIKELY UNLAWFUL
    https://x.com/kylegriffin1/status/1984318238130409574
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 68,652
    Nigelb said:

    Note that the program has a several billion dollar reserve to cover this kind of eventuality.

    It is the administration's choice to suspend food aid.

    Reuters: US JUDGE RULES TRUMP ADMINISTRATION'S PLAN TO SUSPEND SNAP FOOD AID BENEFITS DURING SHUTDOWN IS LIKELY UNLAWFUL
    https://x.com/kylegriffin1/status/1984318238130409574

    The bulk of which goes to their own supporters.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 7,439
    Foxy said:

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    Isnt it established principle that such a decision rests with the King?

    Er, no. Parliament. Act of Settlement.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 7,439

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    Apparently the King is resisting it because it would require all the Commonwealth realms to follow suit.

    There's a fear some of the realms would use the legislation to become republics.

    The King is also worried about parliament in the future choosing who should succeed to the monarchy.

    Starmer doesn't want to get into a row with the King, and both are working on the assumption that the eighth in line will never be King.
    Can he just be turned into a Catholic somehow?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 58,009
    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
    Hexadecimal worked for us.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 15,513
    Catching up on my reading, I see Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride has ruled out an electoral pact or coalition with Reform.

    According to City AM, Stride told the Centre Write blog:

    ..the Conservatives would not look to form a deal despite suggestions it could look to replicate an arrangement in 2019 that the Tories formed with the Brexit Party.

    “I don’t want to have any coalition or arrangement with Reform,” Stride said.

    “Why would I want to have a coalition, or something about a merger, or whatever it may be, with a party whose economic prescription for our country will be completely ruinous?”


    That seems fairly definitive though a) it doesn't rule out confidence & supply support for a Reform minority Government and b) it always has to be remembered what politicians say before an election and what they do after an election are rarely one and the same thing. One example would be Cameron's emphatic refusal to consider a coalition with the LDs 72 hours before polling day in 2010.

    It seems some Conservatives are trying to emerge from out of Reform's shadow though clearly not all (Katie Lam, Robert Jenrick).
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 20,830

    Nigelb said:

    And there it is...

    Announcement is made that the US House will be out of session again next week

    They haven't voted since mid-September

    https://x.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1984309152999465122

    Given that this seems to be motivated purely to prevent sitting the new Representative from Arizona, who would force a vote on the release of the Epstein files, you would think that this would be creating more of a stink.
    What's the plan though? Never sit again?

    It's only 15 months or so until the next House would sit after the mid-terms. Maybe if one of the Democrats dies of natural causes, or otherwise vacates their seat, there will be a window in which the Speaker will call the House again.

    I suppose there will be other stages in the process that they can delay and spin out if they only manage to delay this stage by another few months. Who knows?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 16,703
    carnforth said:

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    He's 8th in line. He's never going to become King. It's a completely academic point.
    Indeed. He was fourth, before the last constitutional change ending primogeniture.
    He was fourth before various babies were born. Primogeniture remains. Male primogeniture was abolished, but that had no impact on his position and only applied to new births.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 16,703

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    If Andy was removed would that mean Beatrice would ascend to the throne if he didn't? Does Andy's removal cut her out in other words?
    You could rewrite the rules however you wanted to, but, no, usually you just remove the individual and not their descendants.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 20,830

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    Apparently the King is resisting it because it would require all the Commonwealth realms to follow suit.

    There's a fear some of the realms would use the legislation to become republics.

    The King is also worried about parliament in the future choosing who should succeed to the monarchy.

    Starmer doesn't want to get into a row with the King, and both are working on the assumption that the eighth in line will never be King.
    Can he just be turned into a Catholic somehow?
    It would be an imaginative workaround to have Andrew deemed to have become Catholic, and thereby removed from the line of succession. A role for the Archbishop of Canterbury, perhaps?
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,187

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    It would require an Act of Parliament that would then have to pass through every single Commonwealth Realm. It could be hijacked by republican movements or amended to, say, remove Harry from the succession as well - and then get stuck in horse-trading for years.

    I can understand why the government don't want to open that particular can of worms for what is a purely theoretical problem.
    The reality is that Andrew will never be king, even in the horrific eventuality where all those ahead of him in the succession were to die. It would be pointless to waste any efforts ruling something out legislatively that will never happen.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 16,703

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    It would require an Act of Parliament that would then have to pass through every single Commonwealth Realm. It could be hijacked by republican movements or amended to, say, remove Harry from the succession as well - and then get stuck in horse-trading for years.

    I can understand why the government don't want to open that particular can of worms for what is a purely theoretical problem.
    The reality is that Andrew will never be king, even in the horrific eventuality where all those ahead of him in the succession were to die. It would be pointless to waste any efforts ruling something out legislatively that will never happen.
    Unless, I suppose, we get a repeat of 2001 Nepal.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,517

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    It would require an Act of Parliament that would then have to pass through every single Commonwealth Realm. It could be hijacked by republican movements or amended to, say, remove Harry from the succession as well - and then get stuck in horse-trading for years.

    I can understand why the government don't want to open that particular can of worms for what is a purely theoretical problem.
    The reality is that Andrew will never be king, even in the horrific eventuality where all those ahead of him in the succession were to die. It would be pointless to waste any efforts ruling something out legislatively that will never happen.
    Unless, I suppose, we get a repeat of 2001 Nepal.
    Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Ralph
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 68,652

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    It would require an Act of Parliament that would then have to pass through every single Commonwealth Realm. It could be hijacked by republican movements or amended to, say, remove Harry from the succession as well - and then get stuck in horse-trading for years.

    I can understand why the government don't want to open that particular can of worms for what is a purely theoretical problem.
    The reality is that Andrew will never be king, even in the horrific eventuality where all those ahead of him in the succession were to die. It would be pointless to waste any efforts ruling something out legislatively that will never happen.
    He may well be 9th soon anyway if Sussex goes for a third.

  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 4,243

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    Apparently the King is resisting it because it would require all the Commonwealth realms to follow suit.

    There's a fear some of the realms would use the legislation to become republics.

    The King is also worried about parliament in the future choosing who should succeed to the monarchy.

    Starmer doesn't want to get into a row with the King, and both are working on the assumption that the eighth in line will never be King.
    Can he just be turned into a Catholic somehow?
    It would be an imaginative workaround to have Andrew deemed to have become Catholic, and thereby removed from the line of succession. A role for the Archbishop of Canterbury, perhaps?
    Sounds somewhat like the Chiltern Hundreds.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 9,140
    If Rachel Reeves were sacked, would that get the ex-Prince Andrew off the PB comments, the BBC and the front pages?
    If so, it's almost worth the sacrifice.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 7,604
    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
    Why would it need to be signed? Are you going to have less than zero kids?
    It's overflow you have to watch out for.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 20,830

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    It would require an Act of Parliament that would then have to pass through every single Commonwealth Realm. It could be hijacked by republican movements or amended to, say, remove Harry from the succession as well - and then get stuck in horse-trading for years.

    I can understand why the government don't want to open that particular can of worms for what is a purely theoretical problem.
    The reality is that Andrew will never be king, even in the horrific eventuality where all those ahead of him in the succession were to die. It would be pointless to waste any efforts ruling something out legislatively that will never happen.
    Unless, I suppose, we get a repeat of 2001 Nepal.
    Even then, I'd expect Parliament to rush a Bill through skipping Andrew to go to the next living/willing individual in the line of succession. Britain has skipped more than 50 before. If the country had to do so again you might end up with someone like Princess Alexandra becoming Queen.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 68,652
    He's running.

    Which kent constituency is going to be lucky?



    Matt Goodwin
    @GoodwinMJ
    ·
    12h
    ✍️NEW POST✍️

    What I said on Question Time

    They hate me, because I speak for you

    https://x.com/GoodwinMJ
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,627
    edited October 31
    Jason Manford, "What do you think will happen to Rachel Reeves?" #HIGNFY

    Louise Haigh, "She made a mistake, she's been exonerated, the Prime Minister was absolutely right to accept her apology"

    Ian Hislop, "People who make mistakes should be exonerated?"

    Louise Haigh, "Well the Prime Minister was equally magnanimous with me, that's why I'm delighted to still be serving as transport secretary"

    Ian Hislop, "It wasn't a mistake really, it was a conviction for fraud"

    Louise Haigh, "It was. It was obviously humiliating, embarrassing"

    Ian Hislop, "Is the word wrong going to come up?"

    Louise Haigh, "It was wrong, I made a mistake, I hold my hands up, I got my conditional discharge"

    Ian Hislop, "Did Keir Starmer know?"

    Louise Haigh, "He did, I told him about it"

    Ian Hislop, "So when he said further information has come to light and fired you, he was lying?"

    Louise Haigh, "Well he never told me what the further information was"

    https://x.com/implausibleblog/status/1984392338333188506
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,341
    Reformers hate everyone, including Tories.

    Hate everyone except for Farage, for some reason.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,627
    In his conference speech two days later, Kyle trumpeted the government’s intervention. He said: “I’ve announced £1.5bn support – a huge amount of money to help a hugely important company.”

    The Financial Times reported that JLR only formally agreed the loan covered by UKEF this month, with HSBC, Mitsubishi UFJ Group and NatWest acting as potential lenders.

    Several sources told the Guardian that none of that loan facility had gone into JLR’s accounts, nor had any gone to any of its suppliers. Instead, the carmaker used its existing large cash reserves for its scheme to help suppliers.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/oct/31/jaguar-land-rover-ministers-claims-15bn-support-untouched
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 82,767

    He's running.

    Which kent constituency is going to be lucky?



    Matt Goodwin
    @GoodwinMJ
    ·
    12h
    ✍️NEW POST✍️

    What I said on Question Time

    They hate me, because I speak for you

    https://x.com/GoodwinMJ

    No, we just think you're a tw@t.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 7,604
    FF43 said:

    Reformers hate everyone, including Tories.

    Hate everyone except for Farage, for some reason.

    Cult of personality, then?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 26,476
    Nigelb said:

    carnforth said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
    Why would it need to be signed? Are you going to have less than zero kids?
    It's overflow you have to watch out for.
    If you're calling your kids numbers, you just need to watch out they aren't irrational.
    Or imaginary
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 26,476

    viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    Rees-Mogg named his 6th child Sixtus, so I think Bart can name a child Eleven.
    Is everyone missing the point, or just playing this straight ?
    I am aware that there is a character in "Stranger Things" that is called "Eleven". However her clothing is not such that would constitute a Halloween costume. So unless Barty had shaved her head, there was no reason to call his child "Eleven" unless that was actually their name. Hence my question.
    She chose who she wanted to be herself, she chose the iconic jumpsuit that Eleven wore in season 3 and used make-up to give herself a nose bleed.

    https://uk.pinterest.com/pin/625648573222597512/
    Ah I see, thank you
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 131,204

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    It would require an Act of Parliament that would then have to pass through every single Commonwealth Realm. It could be hijacked by republican movements or amended to, say, remove Harry from the succession as well - and then get stuck in horse-trading for years.

    I can understand why the government don't want to open that particular can of worms for what is a purely theoretical problem.
    Indeed, not only William and his children but Harry and his children are ahead of Andrew in the line of succession now so I can see why it requires a lot of complication to do for very little actual end result
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 56,426
    CatMan said:

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    It would require an Act of Parliament that would then have to pass through every single Commonwealth Realm. It could be hijacked by republican movements or amended to, say, remove Harry from the succession as well - and then get stuck in horse-trading for years.

    I can understand why the government don't want to open that particular can of worms for what is a purely theoretical problem.
    The reality is that Andrew will never be king, even in the horrific eventuality where all those ahead of him in the succession were to die. It would be pointless to waste any efforts ruling something out legislatively that will never happen.
    Unless, I suppose, we get a repeat of 2001 Nepal.
    Or this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Ralph
    Or King Pascal in Johnny English :lol:
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 131,204

    HYUFD said:

    bobbob said:

    HYUFD said:

    So Reform confirm they would deport even immigrants with indefinite leave to remain, a pretty vile policy.

    Given most of their voters and MPs are ex Tories not a great tactic from Farage to dismiss them either

    Ok so what is your plan to solve the Tory immigrant crisis ? “ Whoops we ‘accidentally’ let 3 million people in can’t do anything now lol” is not an answer

    This country is sick of soft open borders pro immigration wets

    The target should be negative net migrants vs 2010 numbers
    Net migration is already falling due to the tighter visa wage requirements Sunak and Cleverly brought in.

    It doesn't mean you need to go full BNP as well
    If you want to know why the Conservative party are at their lowest point ever, this is it.

    You are divided between people who think immigration is the root of all our problems and those that are broadly content with most of it, bar the boats and hotels. So your policies vary week to week, your messaging is unclear and confusing, and you lose the trust and respect of both groups.

    Make your mind up and stick with it. Don't flirt with the other group whichever path you take.
    I think the main problem is that they said one thing - "net migration in the tens of thousands" - and did another.

    It hardly matters what they say on the subject for at least a decade. Who is going to take them seriously again?
    Who is going to take Labour seriously after their Ming Vase strategy of no rises in Income Tax?

    They are more likely to forget the Tories failings 5+ years on - whereas Labour's will be far more fresh in the mind.

    The Tories will come back. As the natural choice to replace Labour in Government. Maybe. Particualarly if Farage has a health/legal issue that kills Brand Reform.
    You are right about Labour, but I admire your optimism on the Tory revival. Perhaps next week, or at the earliest when Lam or Jenrick take hold of the reins. Jenrick, and particularly Lam will damage Reform substantially. They are singing Reform songs, but with a cheerier tune.
    Jenrick or Lam won't beat Farage, if voters want Faragism they will vote for the real thing
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,451
    Nigelb said:

    carnforth said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
    Why would it need to be signed? Are you going to have less than zero kids?
    It's overflow you have to watch out for.
    If you're calling your kids numbers, you just need to watch out they aren't irrational.
    All those identifying as transcendental must also be irrational. Is there a problem here?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,627
    Talking of bold strategies England going with exactly the same line up in the ODI.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 18,341
    carnforth said:

    FF43 said:

    Reformers hate everyone, including Tories.

    Hate everyone except for Farage, for some reason.

    Cult of personality, then?
    I obviously reject everything Reform stands for. Putting that to the side, Reform really is a party for dismal people. They dislike everybody and every thing.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 56,330
    FF43 said:

    carnforth said:

    FF43 said:

    Reformers hate everyone, including Tories.

    Hate everyone except for Farage, for some reason.

    Cult of personality, then?
    I obviously reject everything Reform stands for. Putting that to the side, Reform really is a party for dismal people. They dislike everybody and every thing.
    Are you not entertained?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sS96BAiOWI
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 88,627
    edited November 1
    Good job England bat deep....

    If they carry on like this the Ashes matches could be as short as 2 day affairs.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,908
    Hallowe’en in Moscow suburbs, with all the lights out.

    https://x.com/visegrad24/status/1984401539721503136
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,894

    Talking of bold strategies England going with exactly the same line up in the ODI.

    What Einstein said.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,908

    Good job England bat deep....

    If they carry on like this the Ashes matches could be as short as 2 day affairs.

    Yet again not using all their overs, and about to get another embarrassing thrashing from the Kiwis.
  • Nigelb said:

    carnforth said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
    Why would it need to be signed? Are you going to have less than zero kids?
    It's overflow you have to watch out for.
    If you're calling your kids numbers, you just need to watch out they aren't irrational.
    In all seriousness, wouldn't Pi be a cute name?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 63,066

    Nigelb said:

    carnforth said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
    Why would it need to be signed? Are you going to have less than zero kids?
    It's overflow you have to watch out for.
    If you're calling your kids numbers, you just need to watch out they aren't irrational.
    In all seriousness, wouldn't Pi be a cute name?
    Good morning, everyone.

    I learnt at school that 'E' was actually a first name, the shortest there apparently is.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,894
    Sandpit said:

    Good job England bat deep....

    If they carry on like this the Ashes matches could be as short as 2 day affairs.

    Yet again not using all their overs, and about to get another embarrassing thrashing from the Kiwis.
    Harry Brook is due to take over the Test captaincy, probably in the summer. He’s not exactly advanced his case with this series.
  • viewcode said:

    Nigelb said:

    carnforth said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
    Why would it need to be signed? Are you going to have less than zero kids?
    It's overflow you have to watch out for.
    If you're calling your kids numbers, you just need to watch out they aren't irrational.
    Or imaginary
    Surely all children are complex.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 7,737

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 35,421
    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 35,421

    Nigelb said:

    carnforth said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    rcs1000 said:

    viewcode said:

    Happy Halloween everyone.

    Had a great time Trick or Treating with our little Eleven and Enid.

    Lovely community spirit, everyone out and about was well dressed and mannered.

    Now observing our traditional annual way of saying goodbye to Halloween and welcoming Christmas by watching Nightmare Before Christmas.

    Pause

    You have a child called "Eleven"?
    There are stranger things to call a child than Eleven surely?
    Is that the benchmark - not quite the strangest name we could call our child?
    Should we turn that benchmark upside down?
    I like the entirely non-binary nature of simply naming your kids by birth order.

    We personally went binary. And obviously, taking our queue from indices, started at zero.

    So, they're zero, one, one-zero, one-one, one-zero-zero and one-zero-one.

    For the record, it isn't confusing at all.
    variable bit length. That is confusing
    We debated having a fixed length, but felt that would either be wasteful or -worse- we'd run out of address space and need to start over. There was also the question about whether we should use signed, or unsigned.

    And my wife wanted to add a parity bit, so that we'd be able to catch people out who got our kids names wrong.
    Why would it need to be signed? Are you going to have less than zero kids?
    It's overflow you have to watch out for.
    If you're calling your kids numbers, you just need to watch out they aren't irrational.
    In all seriousness, wouldn't Pi be a cute name?
    It is still roundly odd. Mind you Eleven is odd too. The Rees-Mogg sprog Sixtus, not so much.
  • TazTaz Posts: 21,845
    carnforth said:

    FF43 said:

    Reformers hate everyone, including Tories.

    Hate everyone except for Farage, for some reason.

    Cult of personality, then?
    C M Punk ?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 40,731
    While both the Tories and the Fukkers claim to be different, it's obvious to many they are interchangeable
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,273

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
  • TazTaz Posts: 21,845

    Jason Manford, "What do you think will happen to Rachel Reeves?" #HIGNFY

    Louise Haigh, "She made a mistake, she's been exonerated, the Prime Minister was absolutely right to accept her apology"

    Ian Hislop, "People who make mistakes should be exonerated?"

    Louise Haigh, "Well the Prime Minister was equally magnanimous with me, that's why I'm delighted to still be serving as transport secretary"

    Ian Hislop, "It wasn't a mistake really, it was a conviction for fraud"

    Louise Haigh, "It was. It was obviously humiliating, embarrassing"

    Ian Hislop, "Is the word wrong going to come up?"

    Louise Haigh, "It was wrong, I made a mistake, I hold my hands up, I got my conditional discharge"

    Ian Hislop, "Did Keir Starmer know?"

    Louise Haigh, "He did, I told him about it"

    Ian Hislop, "So when he said further information has come to light and fired you, he was lying?"

    Louise Haigh, "Well he never told me what the further information was"

    https://x.com/implausibleblog/status/1984392338333188506

    ‘I made a mistake’ 🙄
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 40,731

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    https://x.com/TheDemocrats/status/1984379451548078112
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 35,421

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    For devout Christians there is an immorality of Biblical proportions just below the MAGA surface. The Ten Commandments would seem to apply to anyone and everyone but themselves.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,894

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    He'd have to be careful how he goes about it though. It would have to be couched in acceptable terms.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,552
    Trump's approval rating has reached a second term low or -10.8 on Nate Silver's poll aggregator. There's a lot of divergence within that, for example YouGov has it at -19.

    For the long-term good of the world we could do with a spike in US inflation or a real economy recession (i.e ignoring AI spending) to help those ratings go further south before the mid-terms.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 35,421
    Scott_xP said:

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    https://x.com/TheDemocrats/status/1984379451548078112
    If one would like to ruin their day before it starts just read the comments below...
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,273

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    Apparently the King is resisting it because it would require all the Commonwealth realms to follow suit.

    There's a fear some of the realms would use the legislation to become republics.

    The King is also worried about parliament in the future choosing who should succeed to the monarchy.

    Starmer doesn't want to get into a row with the King, and both are working on the assumption that the eighth in line will never be King.
    Can he just be turned into a Catholic somehow?
    And then burnt at the stake? That would be a popular day out...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,894

    Question (with apologies if this has already been discussed)

    Why is Starmer refusing to instigate the removal of Andrew Windsor from the Succession? Does anyone really think it would be a bad idea? In purely political terms this seems like a clear win for Starmer and he would almost certainly even have the support of the King. But he apparently is resisting doing it. I find that surprising.

    Apparently the King is resisting it because it would require all the Commonwealth realms to follow suit.

    There's a fear some of the realms would use the legislation to become republics.

    The King is also worried about parliament in the future choosing who should succeed to the monarchy.

    Starmer doesn't want to get into a row with the King, and both are working on the assumption that the eighth in line will never be King.
    Can he just be turned into a Catholic somehow?
    And then burnt at the stake? That would be a popular day out...
    Burning somebody as oily as him would have serious environmental implications.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,894
    New Zealand waltzing to the easiest of easy victories here.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,872
    edited November 1
    Now that's what you'd call a 'win'.
    Samia wins Tanzania election with 98% of votes amid unrest
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cm2ww0e0jewo
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,696
    Today's study in utter b*ll*cks:

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/nov/01/britain-one-of-least-nature-connected-nations-in-world-with-nepal-the-most

    "Researchers from Britain and Austria, led by Miles Richardson, professor of nature connectedness at the University of Derby, found the strongest indicator for a close relationship with nature was high levels of “spirituality" in a society. More religious societies and cultures where there was a preference for faith over science showed high levels of nature connection."
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 56,273
    ydoethur said:

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    He'd have to be careful how he goes about it though. It would have to be couched in acceptable terms.
    His career could be termed sofa, so good...
  • TazTaz Posts: 21,845
    San Marino Football trolling Lolverpool


  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 16,703

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    For devout Christians there is an immorality of Biblical proportions just below the MAGA surface. The Ten Commandments would seem to apply to anyone and everyone but themselves.
    The Christian Right don’t care about infidelity or divorce. They do care about Whiteness.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 17,187

    He's running.

    Which kent constituency is going to be lucky?



    Matt Goodwin
    @GoodwinMJ
    ·
    12h
    ✍️NEW POST✍️

    What I said on Question Time

    They hate me, because I speak for you

    https://x.com/GoodwinMJ

    Talk about a messiah complex.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,894

    ydoethur said:

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    He'd have to be careful how he goes about it though. It would have to be couched in acceptable terms.
    His career could be termed sofa, so good...
    I'm going to say that it's not been good for America though.

    I realise this may sound chairlish.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,894

    He's running.

    Which kent constituency is going to be lucky?



    Matt Goodwin
    @GoodwinMJ
    ·
    12h
    ✍️NEW POST✍️

    What I said on Question Time

    They hate me, because I speak for you

    https://x.com/GoodwinMJ

    Talk about a messiah complex.
    There's no messiah here. There's a mess alright, but no messiah.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 35,421

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    For devout Christians there is an immorality of Biblical proportions just below the MAGA surface. The Ten Commandments would seem to apply to anyone and everyone but themselves.
    The Christian Right don’t care about infidelity or divorce. They do care about Whiteness.
    Just wait until they learn what colour Jesus most likely was.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 57,908
    New Zealand are making hard work of this. They’re not going to run out of balls, but they may well run out of wickets. 192/7 target 223.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,894

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    For devout Christians there is an immorality of Biblical proportions just below the MAGA surface. The Ten Commandments would seem to apply to anyone and everyone but themselves.
    The Christian Right don’t care about infidelity or divorce. They do care about Whiteness.
    Just wait until they learn what colour Jesus most likely was.
    Or indeed what religion he was...
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,696
    Sandpit said:

    New Zealand are making hard work of this. They’re not going to run out of balls, but they may well run out of wickets. 192/7 target 223.

    Tsk! You just had to say it didn't you ;-)
  • NEW THREAD

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 25,599

    boulay said:

    Republicans against Trump
    @RpsAgainstTrump
    ·
    6h
    Erika Kirk: “No one will ever replace my husband, but I do see some similarities of my husband in JD”


    =====

    Is there a market on Vance's veep running mate?

    There’s a lot of talk on the non crazy end of the internet about JDV and EK. It appears the Mrs V isn’t a happy bunny anyway, doesn’t help that JDV said on Thursday at a Charlie Kirk event “I honestly do wish that because I believe in the Christian gospel, and I hope eventually, my wife comes to see it the same way,”

    There were some interesting photos of the physical interaction between EK and JDV which a lot of people are describing as inappropriate for a married man and a recent widow (I don’t know what the acceptable mourning to flirting rules are).

    I did find a comment amusing where someone had her saying how much she loves her spray-on leather mourning pants.

    So not sure which of his “running mate” or “mate” are the better bet.
    The anti-Trump Dem channels I follow have been saying for a while that Usha is not Maga First Lady material. Erika on the other hand would be a great fit for them.
    Vance has changed his name, so it is easy to believe he is cynical enough to change his wife if it helps his career.
    For devout Christians there is an immorality of Biblical proportions just below the MAGA surface. The Ten Commandments would seem to apply to anyone and everyone but themselves.
    The Christian Right don’t care about infidelity or divorce. They do care about Whiteness.
    Just wait until they learn what colour Jesus most likely was.
    Abd Allah ibn Abbas says Jesus was of "moderate complexion inclined to the red and white colors and of lank hair"

    Red and white eh, that's clearly old fashioned for orange. This really is the second coming.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 75,894

    Sandpit said:

    New Zealand are making hard work of this. They’re not going to run out of balls, but they may well run out of wickets. 192/7 target 223.

    Tsk! You just had to say it didn't you ;-)
    Zak is now in.

    Unfortunately, not Zak Crawley but a much better batsman named Zak Foulkes, who bats No. 9.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 20,448
    FF43 said:

    Reformers hate everyone, including Tories.

    Hate everyone except for Farage, for some reason.

    Including, in many cases, each other.

    Probably inevitable if your politics is defined more by your dislikes than your likes. (Good-old-days-ism doesn't help here, because everyone looks back nostalgically on a different youth.)
  • TazTaz Posts: 21,845

    FF43 said:

    Reformers hate everyone, including Tories.

    Hate everyone except for Farage, for some reason.

    Including, in many cases, each other.

    Probably inevitable if your politics is defined more by your dislikes than your likes. (Good-old-days-ism doesn't help here, because everyone looks back nostalgically on a different youth.)
    Is there no end to their evil !!
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,618

    stodge said:

    bobbob said:

    HYUFD said:

    bobbob said:

    HYUFD said:

    bobbob said:

    HYUFD said:

    So Reform confirm they would deport even immigrants with indefinite leave to remain, a pretty vile policy.

    Given most of their voters and MPs are ex Tories not a great tactic from Farage to dismiss them either

    Ok so what is your plan to solve the Tory immigrant crisis ? “ Whoops we ‘accidentally’ let 3 million people in can’t do anything now lol” is not an answer

    This country is sick of soft open borders pro immigration wets

    The target should be negative net migrants vs 2010 numbers
    Net migration is already falling due to the tighter visa wage requirements Sunak and Cleverly brought in.

    It doesn't mean you need to go full BNP as well
    So there are fewer migrants in the uk than in 2010 ? Or are UK migrant numbers still increasing ?

    What is the alternative plan to reduce the number of migrants in the UK ? Not reduce the RATE of increase but reduce them full stop. No one else seems to have one
    Kick them all out? As I presume you back? Hence you are voting for Farage
    Open to other options. Extra taxes on migrants is the only other option I’ve seen suggested

    We need a one off migrant policy reset back to sanity
    Interesting to see applause on QT for the comment we spend so much time debating fewer than 40,000 people arriving on small boats versus children in poverty.

    Perhaps finally we're getting our priorities right.
    QT audiences are like election hustings. The local great and good from political parties, local ngos and councils attend en masse.

    Went to hustings in 2019 in a constituency that overwhelmingly voted brexit, the Tory mp (who didn’t vote to leave) got booed when he insisted that it was important that the vote be respected. The audience was hostile to everything he said. By the measure of the hustings you would think he was going to lose his seat. He won with an 8,000 majority.
    I have been watching BBC QuestionTime since I became in engaged with politics nearly 40 years ago, a rule of thumb, I have always enjoyed watching and guessing the the tribal activists who were either engaged enough to turn up in the audience and who managed to get to ask a question or got a response as a member of the audience as a result. It has always amused me when their opponents were quick to rush onto social media to out them as a tribal member of a particular party as if it was a crime for a political anorak from a political party to be so engaged they took part in the longest running political TV debate show on TV!

    Who else would be bothered enough to engage and appear on BBC QuestionTime?! When ever there is a particular issue making the news, you can be sure that the next week there will be plenty vocal advocates for that issue in the audience. Where ever BBC Question TIme is, its never ever a really balanced audience of the views across the UK on the night.

    A funny story, BBC Scotland were doing a Scottish leadership debate at Aberdeen University, now son No1 and son No3 who were Scottish Conservative voters at the time happened to be home when it was advertised and I said go for it you will standout and you will get picked, and they did! They had a great night, they were laughing because even the the Labour supporting ladies behind them raved about Ruth Davidson's performance. And to add to that at the end of the debate a lady who was a Scottish Libdem ran up to her and said you were great, and I say that as a SLibdem who cannot vote vote for you! But my favourite moment was son No3 sending me a message with a picture of son No1 with Ruth Davidson after the debate, and saying thanks Mum for pushing us to apply and go to this debate, we had a brilliant night!
Sign In or Register to comment.