Skip to content

Generational damage – politicalbetting.com

135

Comments

  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,240
    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,849

    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Regardless of what one thinks about Harris, in US politics, is that statement really true?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
    Yes, she was right and would have been better by far, but if she couldn't beat Trump (notwithstanding the economy and his fervently passionate base as major challenges), then part of that has to be on her, and I don't think she deserves a do-over against Vance or Rubio.
  • Leon_VotedForStarmerLeon_VotedForStarmer Posts: 69,000
    edited April 10
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Don't tell their noble lords about booktok, romantasy, shadow daddies, and 'beast' fiction.

    Not all of it is smut, but I've heard some stuff that'd make their hair go white.

    I'd love to be witness to the Lords debate on "Bigfoot erotica" and "dinosaur porn"

    https://www.amazon.com/Dinosaur-Erotica-8-book-series/dp/B0BKTPR4K9

    "My wet hot allosaurus summer"
    Only an 8 book series? It was clearly just getting going too.
    "This disgusting form of pornography shamelessly denigrates enormous lizard-like animal species that no one has ever witnessed, who are clearly in no position to consent as they all went extinct after a massive asteroid strike 90 million years ago, it makes me sick, and I have evidence from a retired GP in Leicester"
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814

    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Regardless of what one thinks about Harris, in US politics, is that statement really true?
    Ok, their ability to raise campaign funds and cosy up to billionaires.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,886
    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,961
    edited April 10
  • kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    kle4 said:

    Don't tell their noble lords about booktok, romantasy, shadow daddies, and 'beast' fiction.

    Not all of it is smut, but I've heard some stuff that'd make their hair go white.

    I'd love to be witness to the Lords debate on "Bigfoot erotica" and "dinosaur porn"

    https://www.amazon.com/Dinosaur-Erotica-8-book-series/dp/B0BKTPR4K9

    "My wet hot allosaurus summer"
    Only an 8 book series? It was clearly just getting going too.

    But being serious for a moment, the Lords should debate those things - Parliament sets limits on porn content, and what is obscene and not obscene, and if they are adding further things here they really need to do a thorough exploration of everything to determine what is permissable and what is not.

    Genuine comment. Otherwise they are making law on the hoof, not examining in depth the reasons why some is ok and some is not.
    "on the hoof"

    OOOOOH Saucy
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,961

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    I smell Lord Hermer advice....
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,240

    Judean People's Front latest:

    Alan Travis
    @alantravis40

    Interesting list of far left parties Corbyn's Your Party set to purge from its ranks this weekend. Wonder how many members will be left once they've all been booted?
    Nb, No Your Party candidates have been nominated to stand in May's council elections in Corbyn's Islington.

    https://x.com/alantravis40/status/2042639470395072708

    There's a bunch of far-left parties that will be gutted at not making the list. Imagine being of such insignificance that Your Party doesn't explicitly ban your members from joining it? The shame.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814
    I kind of feel for Starmer on this one. Not that I supported the Chagos Bill (the moralistic argument was underwhelming considering neither we nor Mauritius cared about the Chagossians, and the technical legal argument seemed a bit thin, and it's all just about who lets the USA have a base there anyway), but opponents were begging Trump to withdraw support as he came into office and he didn't, then he said he might, then didnt again, do Starmer has just been jerked about.

  • BurgessianBurgessian Posts: 3,817

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
    Quite extraordinary how such obvious duds somehow manage to rise to the top before crashing and burning. Happens time and time again. What is it that compels this to happen? Beats me.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 61,140
    What a ridiculous waste of political capital, hah.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 79,502
    If we're banning incest related porn, are we going to have to rename the Oedipus complex?
  • nico67nico67 Posts: 8,326
    Regardless of what people think of the Chagos situation this is just another example of Trumps pathetic behaviour .
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 136,924
    edited April 10

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
    She did have some skills to be fair to her persuading the rich of her brilliance and her great ideas for the nation.

    Harris was the first Democratic presidential nominee ever to win US voters earning over $100,000 a year, beating Trump 51% to 47% with those high earners.

    Unfortunately her skills passed ordinary voters who decide US elections by, Kamala lost US voters with household incomes under $100,000 by 51% to 47% and Trump even managed to beat her with voters earning below the average US income and less than $50,000 a year 50% to 48%.

    Indeed she was so disconnected from Main Street compared to the woke coastal rich she managed to win 52% of the highest earning voters earning over $200,000 a year but just 50% of the poorest voters earning under $30,000 a year

    https://edition.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0
  • nico67 said:

    Regardless of what people think of the Chagos situation this is just another example of Trumps pathetic behaviour .

    No. It’s fucking hilarious. The bill was insane and treasonous. Starmer, Sands and Hermer should stand trial for it under the next Reform government. And I am perfectly serious
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 56,870
    ydoethur said:

    If we're banning incest related porn, are we going to have to rename the Oedipus complex?

    As I recall Oedipus did end with remorse and punishment, albeit self inflicted, that would prevent viewing porn.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 136,924
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Worst government ever.

    Starmer U-turns over stepsister porn ban

    Labour agrees to back Lords amendment to broaden definition of illegal online depictions of ‘incest’


    Sir Keir Starmer has backed a ban on online pornography depicting step-relatives after a rebellion by female MPs and peers.

    The move represents a significant climbdown as ministers had previously resisted a ban on material depicting “step-incest” because many relationships between adult step-relatives are not illegal in real life.

    In March, the Government was defeated in the Lords by peers who backed, by 144 votes to 143, an amendment by Baroness Bertin, a Conservative peer, calling for step-incest to be included in a ban on harmful online content. Baroness Bertin led a government review on porn regulation last year.

    That vote left the Government facing a potential Commons rebellion by disgruntled female Labour MPs who said they would not support ministers in overturning the amendment.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/04/10/stepsister-porn-banned-labour-starmer/

    I mean really, haven't the police and CPS got better things to do and serious criminals to catch instead of wasting funds arresting people for watching porn depicting adults not genetically related in real life engaging in sexual acts legal in real life? Baroness Bertin is absurd as are Labour in backing her ridiculous amendment
    To a degree.

    When I worked on the youth mental health ward nearly all the patients had a history of sexual abuse, nearly all from stepfathers or step brothers.

    Step-incest is not some sort of benign kink, like a love of leather or latex, for many it is a life changing form of abuse.
    So what? It doesn't mean porn depicting it should be illegal, extreme porn if it involves violence or non consensual sexual activity is already illegal anyway
    It normalises sexual abuse. This report from America gives some perspective:

    "Analysis of interviews obtained from a random sample of 930 adult women in San Francisco revealed that 17% or one out of approximately every six women who had a stepfather as a principal figure in her childhood years, was sexually abused by him. The comparable figures for biological fathers were 2% or one out of approximately 40 women. In addition, when a distinction was made between Very Serious Sexual Abuse (including experiences ranging from forced penile-vaginal penetration to non-forceful attempted fellatio, cunnilingus , and anal intercourse) and other less serious forms, 47% of the cases of sexual abuse by stepfathers were at the Very Serious level of violation compared with 26% by biological fathers."

    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6609753/
    So what? Sexual abuse porn is already illegal, there will be plenty of consensual sexual activity between step siblings and step parents and step children though, including depicted in porn
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,849
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    If we're banning incest related porn, are we going to have to rename the Oedipus complex?

    As I recall Oedipus did end with remorse and punishment, albeit self inflicted, that would prevent viewing porn.
    Certainly was a twist on the usual trope of "if you keep doing that you'll go blind".
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 32,602
    HYUFD said:

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
    She did have some skills to be fair to her persuading the rich of her brilliance and her great ideas for the nation.

    Harris was the first Democratic presidential nominee ever to win US voters earning over $100,000 a year, beating Trump 51% to 47% with those high earners.

    Unfortunately her skills passed ordinary voters who decide US elections by, Kamala lost US voters with household incomes under $100,000 by 51% to 47% and Trump even managed to beat her with voters earning below the average US income and less than $50,000 a year 50% to 48%.

    Indeed she was so disconnected from Main Street compared to the woke coastal rich she managed to win 52% of the highest earning voters earning over $200,000 a year but just 50% of the poorest voters earning under $30,000 a year

    https://edition.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0
    Those aren't margins much beyond MOE.
    Almost as if income was virtually irrelevant as a predictor of voting patterns.
    Certainly when compared to age, gender, rural/urban, education level, race and a host of other metrics.
  • BOOK RECOMMENDATION

    “The Horse, the Wheel and Language”

    Dense, brilliant, full of profundity. About the origins of all Europeans, and half of Asia
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,866
    The government needs to put a stop to actual incest rather worrying about pornography.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 20,986

    Judean People's Front latest:

    Alan Travis
    @alantravis40

    Interesting list of far left parties Corbyn's Your Party set to purge from its ranks this weekend. Wonder how many members will be left once they've all been booted?
    Nb, No Your Party candidates have been nominated to stand in May's council elections in Corbyn's Islington.

    https://x.com/alantravis40/status/2042639470395072708

    They are right to kick out a bunch of Trotskyite entryists. But what's happening with the internal politics? They had a battle over whether to allow SWP members to be in YP at conference and Sultana won that. But the Corbynites appear to have done better in the internal elections. Is this them now reversing that?

    Will Sultana ultimately leave?
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 6,058

    https://x.com/i_ammukhtar/status/2042587057910878631

    It’s actually wild that Nigel Farage thought nobody would notice that the couple who won his energy bills prize draw were actually his friends.

    Is there anything honest about Farage?

    Actually it's probably a sign that it was a genuine draw. Party activists will have been disproportionately likely to a) know about it and b) get tickets, so it's not surprising if one of them was the winner.
    You are a Trump fan and I claim my five(million) pounds.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 59,886
    https://x.com/JenniferJJacobs/status/2042695128003850636

    "Macron has invited U.S. President Donald Trump to a sumptuous dinner at the ornate Palace of Versailles the day after a G7 summit in mid-June, although it remains unclear if Trump will attend either event, ‌sources said. France is the host of this year's G7," @gabstargardter reports
  • Judean People's Front latest:

    Alan Travis
    @alantravis40

    Interesting list of far left parties Corbyn's Your Party set to purge from its ranks this weekend. Wonder how many members will be left once they've all been booted?
    Nb, No Your Party candidates have been nominated to stand in May's council elections in Corbyn's Islington.

    https://x.com/alantravis40/status/2042639470395072708

    They are right to kick out a bunch of Trotskyite entryists. But what's happening with the internal politics? They had a battle over whether to allow SWP members to be in YP at conference and Sultana won that. But the Corbynites appear to have done better in the internal elections. Is this them now reversing that?

    Will Sultana ultimately leave?
    With respect, who gives a f*ck.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 6,058
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    If we're banning incest related porn, are we going to have to rename the Oedipus complex?

    As I recall Oedipus did end with remorse and punishment, albeit self inflicted, that would prevent viewing porn.
    Self-inflicted remorse-porn is the only genre I watch.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 56,870
    Uh Oh, he's awake and trying to provoke a @TSE header...

    “RANKED-CHOICE VOTING IS ONE OF THE GREATEST THREATS TO DEMOCRACY, and every single Alaskan should support the effort to repeal it once and for all.”

    https://bsky.app/profile/paleofuture.bsky.social/post/3mj64toqg6c2y
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 136,924
    edited April 10
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
    She did have some skills to be fair to her persuading the rich of her brilliance and her great ideas for the nation.

    Harris was the first Democratic presidential nominee ever to win US voters earning over $100,000 a year, beating Trump 51% to 47% with those high earners.

    Unfortunately her skills passed ordinary voters who decide US elections by, Kamala lost US voters with household incomes under $100,000 by 51% to 47% and Trump even managed to beat her with voters earning below the average US income and less than $50,000 a year 50% to 48%.

    Indeed she was so disconnected from Main Street compared to the woke coastal rich she managed to win 52% of the highest earning voters earning over $200,000 a year but just 50% of the poorest voters earning under $30,000 a year

    https://edition.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0
    Those aren't margins much beyond MOE.
    Almost as if income was virtually irrelevant as a predictor of voting patterns.
    Certainly when compared to age, gender, rural/urban, education level, race and a host of other metrics.
    It isn't, the pattern is global income and social class is back in a big way as a predictor of voting intentions and increasingly it is the liberal left parties doing best amongst the rich and high earners and that applies here too. So a reverse of the 20th century when Labour and leftwing parties did best amongst the poor and working class voters and centre right parties did best amongst higher earners and the rich. For the populist nationalist right parties which have overtaken the centre right have voting blocks closer to the traditional left of centre voting white working class and the left liberals often win high earners who used to vote centre right.

    Labour and the LDs do best now amongst the wealthy and high earners, as does Macron and his party in France and the Canadian Liberals and Australian Labor. Whereas Trump, Le Pen and her party, Farage and Reform and One Nation poll much better amongst working class voters.

    Age was a divide between Tory and Labour but class is a big divide between Labour and Reform and of course in Tory v Reform contests class is the predictor
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
    Quite extraordinary how such obvious duds somehow manage to rise to the top before crashing and burning. Happens time and time again. What is it that compels this to happen? Beats me.
    The skills required to get to the top of a political party are not necessarily the skills required to win election or govern well.

    Kamala Harris had a multi-decade long backstory - a career in politics climbing the rungs.

    At the national level, she turned out to be the B- candidate. Not once, but several times - there’s a reason she got the VP job.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,849
    ohnotnow said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    If we're banning incest related porn, are we going to have to rename the Oedipus complex?

    As I recall Oedipus did end with remorse and punishment, albeit self inflicted, that would prevent viewing porn.
    Self-inflicted remorse-porn is the only genre I watch.
    Well, until the government bans it
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 128,599
    Foxy said:

    Uh Oh, he's awake and trying to provoke a @TSE header...

    “RANKED-CHOICE VOTING IS ONE OF THE GREATEST THREATS TO DEMOCRACY, and every single Alaskan should support the effort to repeal it once and for all.”

    https://bsky.app/profile/paleofuture.bsky.social/post/3mj64toqg6c2y

    This is why people should back AV, if you don't then you're on the same side as Donald Trump.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 6,058

    ohnotnow said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    If we're banning incest related porn, are we going to have to rename the Oedipus complex?

    As I recall Oedipus did end with remorse and punishment, albeit self inflicted, that would prevent viewing porn.
    Self-inflicted remorse-porn is the only genre I watch.
    Well, until the government bans it
    "Labour back-benchers vote for keeping the two-child benefit cap! See them give remorseful speeches. See them weep over their broken campaign promises! HOT! HOT! HOT!"
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 9,247
    edited April 10

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    If we have no returns agreement and no prospect of one it hardly matters. They would end up living here permanently anyway.

    Edit: I suspect Russia would take them back as quasi-POWs, but would the ECHR let us send them? We wouldn't consider them combatants, surely?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814
    Foxy said:

    Uh Oh, he's awake and trying to provoke a @TSE header...

    “RANKED-CHOICE VOTING IS ONE OF THE GREATEST THREATS TO DEMOCRACY, and every single Alaskan should support the effort to repeal it once and for all.”

    https://bsky.app/profile/paleofuture.bsky.social/post/3mj64toqg6c2y

    I mean, Alaska voters approved it in the first place, whilst voting for Trump as President, and for GOP Senate and Congressional candidates, maybe blame them for it.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 15,649
    edited April 10

    ydoethur said:

    If we're banning incest related porn, are we going to have to rename the Oedipus complex?

    I’ve got a joke involving Oedipus and Midas.

    It’s motherfucking gold.
    Apparently the first words the infant Oedipus ever spoke were 'I want my mummy'.

    Then again, as the Jewish matriarch said - 'Oedipus, schmoedipus, what's wrong with a boy loving his mother?'



    Ok, I'm going. Where'd I leave it?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,516
    Foxy said:

    Uh Oh, he's awake and trying to provoke a @TSE header...

    “RANKED-CHOICE VOTING IS ONE OF THE GREATEST THREATS TO DEMOCRACY, and every single Alaskan should support the effort to repeal it once and for all.”

    https://bsky.app/profile/paleofuture.bsky.social/post/3mj64toqg6c2y

    To be fair, he knows a lot about threats to democracy.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 136,924
    edited April 10
    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
    She did have some skills to be fair to her persuading the rich of her brilliance and her great ideas for the nation.

    Harris was the first Democratic presidential nominee ever to win US voters earning over $100,000 a year, beating Trump 51% to 47% with those high earners.

    Unfortunately her skills passed ordinary voters who decide US elections by, Kamala lost US voters with household incomes under $100,000 by 51% to 47% and Trump even managed to beat her with voters earning below the average US income and less than $50,000 a year 50% to 48%.

    Indeed she was so disconnected from Main Street compared to the woke coastal rich she managed to win 52% of the highest earning voters earning over $200,000 a year but just 50% of the poorest voters earning under $30,000 a year

    https://edition.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0
    Those aren't margins much beyond MOE.
    Almost as if income was virtually irrelevant as a predictor of voting patterns.
    Certainly when compared to age, gender, rural/urban, education level, race and a host of other metrics.
    It isn't, the pattern is global income and social class is back in a big way as a predictor of voting intentions and increasingly it is the liberal left parties doing best amongst the rich and high earners and that applies here too. So a reverse of the 20th century when Labour and leftwing parties did best amongst the poor and working class voters and centre right parties did best amongst higher earners and the rich. For the populist nationalist right parties which have overtaken the centre right have voting blocks closer to the traditional left of centre voting white working class and the left liberals often win high earners who used to vote centre right.

    Labour and the LDs do best now amongst the wealthy and high earners, as does Macron and his party in France and the Canadian Liberals and Australian Labor. Whereas Trump, Le Pen and her party, Farage and Reform and One Nation poll much better amongst working class voters.

    Age was a divide between Tory and Labour but class is a big divide between Labour and Reform and of course in Tory v Reform contests class is the predictor
    Indeed Harris was just 1% behind Trump amongst voters over 65 while Harris beat Trump by a wider 6% margin amongst voters earning over $200 000. Harris only beat voters by 4% amongst voters aged 30-44, while Trump beat Harris by 2% amongst voters earning under $50,000
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 56,870

    https://x.com/JenniferJJacobs/status/2042695128003850636

    "Macron has invited U.S. President Donald Trump to a sumptuous dinner at the ornate Palace of Versailles the day after a G7 summit in mid-June, although it remains unclear if Trump will attend either event, ‌sources said. France is the host of this year's G7," @gabstargardter reports

    Perhaps a visit to the Bastille followed by a short tumbril ride to the Place de la Concorde would make a suitable climax to Trumps visit? It would get the bigliest crowd, far biglier than Biden would get.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814
    Also, thanks to their voting system this was the result in the 2022 Senate election in Alaska, you'd think Trump would like that (I know Murkowski occasionally has to appear lukewarm to Trump, but presumably she's mostly reliable).


  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,251

    https://x.com/i_ammukhtar/status/2042587057910878631

    It’s actually wild that Nigel Farage thought nobody would notice that the couple who won his energy bills prize draw were actually his friends.

    Is there anything honest about Farage?

    The 'winners' on behalf of their whole street were Reform members - hardly surprising given the likely make up of the entrants (did you enter for example?), and it has been verified that they were selected at random from the entries.

    This is truly desperate.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 72,193
    West Ham 3 - Wolves 0 after 74 minutes

    Spurs in bottom three
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,961

    https://x.com/i_ammukhtar/status/2042587057910878631

    It’s actually wild that Nigel Farage thought nobody would notice that the couple who won his energy bills prize draw were actually his friends.

    Is there anything honest about Farage?

    The 'winners' on behalf of their whole street were Reform members - hardly surprising given the likely make up of the entrants (did you enter for example?), and it has been verified that they were selected at random from the entries.

    This is truly desperate.
    Rather than the government wasting time worrying about Leon pron habits there is actually a big scandal / issue they should be addressing. The explosion of these prize draw sites, they are unregulated and huge amount of dodgy tales. They are exploiting a loophole, driving a double decker bus through it and punters are suppose to trust that it is all on the up and up.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 22,035
    Leon said:

    BOOK RECOMMENDATION

    “The Horse, the Wheel and Language”

    Dense, brilliant, full of profundity. About the origins of all Europeans, and half of Asia

    Yes I have this book. It’s very good.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 79,502

    Foxy said:

    Uh Oh, he's awake and trying to provoke a @TSE header...

    “RANKED-CHOICE VOTING IS ONE OF THE GREATEST THREATS TO DEMOCRACY, and every single Alaskan should support the effort to repeal it once and for all.”

    https://bsky.app/profile/paleofuture.bsky.social/post/3mj64toqg6c2y

    This is why people should back AV, if you don't then you're on the same side as Donald Trump.
    Never thought of David Cameron as a MAGA nutter, but I suppose he did work with Steve Hilton.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 35,251
    Foxy said:

    HYUFD said:

    Worst government ever.

    Starmer U-turns over stepsister porn ban

    Labour agrees to back Lords amendment to broaden definition of illegal online depictions of ‘incest’


    Sir Keir Starmer has backed a ban on online pornography depicting step-relatives after a rebellion by female MPs and peers.

    The move represents a significant climbdown as ministers had previously resisted a ban on material depicting “step-incest” because many relationships between adult step-relatives are not illegal in real life.

    In March, the Government was defeated in the Lords by peers who backed, by 144 votes to 143, an amendment by Baroness Bertin, a Conservative peer, calling for step-incest to be included in a ban on harmful online content. Baroness Bertin led a government review on porn regulation last year.

    That vote left the Government facing a potential Commons rebellion by disgruntled female Labour MPs who said they would not support ministers in overturning the amendment.


    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2026/04/10/stepsister-porn-banned-labour-starmer/

    I mean really, haven't the police and CPS got better things to do and serious criminals to catch instead of wasting funds arresting people for watching porn depicting adults not genetically related in real life engaging in sexual acts legal in real life? Baroness Bertin is absurd as are Labour in backing her ridiculous amendment
    To a degree.

    When I worked on the youth mental health ward nearly all the patients had a history of sexual abuse, nearly all from stepfathers or step brothers.

    Step-incest is not some sort of benign kink, like a love of leather or latex, for many it is a life changing form of abuse.
    Nevertheless, if it is not illegal, it is hard to see a justification for pornographic representations of it being made illegal.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 8,097
    edited April 10
    carnforth said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    If we have no returns agreement and no prospect of one it hardly matters. They would end up living here permanently anyway.

    Edit: I suspect Russia would take them back as quasi-POWs, but would the ECHR let us send them? We wouldn't consider them combatants, surely?
    It would be terrible if British torpedoes accidentally destroyed Russian submarines, and there were no survivors, but Windsor Davies applies.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,516

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
  • PJHPJH Posts: 1,142
    Nominations in Havant are interesting - each ward has 1 Reform, 1 Tory and 1 of Labour/LD/Green, who are each standing in 4 out of 12 wards! A clear anti-Reform alliance there? Is anyone in Hampshire able to shed any light on it?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,961
    edited April 10
    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    It such a BS argument. All they have to do is claim they are coming to visit Salisbury cathedral....

    That been said the Iranians agents into the UK via small boats.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554
    carnforth said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    If we have no returns agreement and no prospect of one it hardly matters. They would end up living here permanently anyway.

    Edit: I suspect Russia would take them back as quasi-POWs, but would the ECHR let us send them? We wouldn't consider them combatants, surely?
    Plant some step-mom porn on them. Then they can be imprisoned for life plus 99 years.

    Do I have to do all the thinking for this government?
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 9,247
    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    Probably 12 genuine seafarers and 2 agents though. If we can tell them apart we could let the seafarers defect.

    (Are we allowed defectors now? Or do we have to lump them in with economic migrants?)
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 34,535
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    tlg86 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    FPT, and remarkably (and coincidentally) on topic:

    Earlier, @BartholomewRoberts raised the question of whether the rise in the amount of criticism of Israel in the West was due to more Muslims.

    So, I decided to do some digging. The Pew Research Center is probably the best resource for comparing views on Israel from different countries over time. Plus, there's also Morning Consult, which does similar numbers.

    And the answer is... it does not appear so.

    If you take two countries with essentially no Muslim immigration (South Korea and Japan), then both countries populations have become signifcantly less enamoured with Israel in the last five years or so. South Korea has gone from basically flat favorability to -60. While Japan has swung to an even more negative -79.

    These shifts are, if anything, even worse than the moves in countries with significant Muslim minorities.

    Now, could it be because memories of the holocaust are fading?

    Sure, that could be a role.

    But something terrible happening in the past to your ancestors doesn't give you the right to be a shit now. I wouldn't say to an Armenian, "hey, go kick a Turk, after all, his ancestors were responsible for the Armenian genocide."

    It's interesting that you bring up the holocaust. There was a much more recent genocide of jews on 7 October 2023.

    My view is that the Americans (and anyone else who cares about Israel) should have said to the Israelis "leave it to us, we'll sort this" and then you say to the Palestinians "either you play nice with us or you play nice with the Israelis."

    That doesn't mean I think what's happened since is acceptable, but the Palestinians, Hezbollah and their backers get a free pass from Western observers.
    So, there are two Palestines.

    There's the West Bank and there's Gaza.

    They have -historically- had different governments. One (Gaza) was run by Hamas. The other (the West Bank) was run by Fatah.

    Gaza attacked Israel in October 7, not the West Bank.

    Why should the Palestinians in the West Bank pay for the actions of Hamas in Gaza?
    Okay, replace Palestinians with Gazans in my post clever clogs.
    My posts have all been about the West Bank, though.

    Because -while I think Israel has over-reacted to the October 7 attacks- it was attacked, and it was (and maybe still is) defending itself.

    That doesn't make the creeping invasion of the West Bank, that long predates October 7, any more acceptable.
    But I very much support the Israelis staying there. They pulled out of Gaza and look what happened. Exactly the same would happen in the West Bank.
    So, your basic premise is that Palestinians and Israelis should not be afforded the same rights?
    Why would Israel afford the same rights to non-Israelis?
    Why should the Palestinians not have the right to national self determination the same as the Israelis?

    Should they have to exist in ever smaller bantustans hemmed in by encroaching settlements that steal their land and water?
    Because, ultimately, there’s plenty of arab states but only one Jewish state.
    There are plenty of european states too, so why should England exist?

    Denying that Palestinians are a people with a national consciousness is one of the steps to cultural genocide.
    No matter what reform think, the English haven’t been persecuted for thousands of years. I don’t expect you to understand, as a non-Jew, but the Jewish state is of absolute vital importance.
    I agree. It is. But that doesn't give them the right to treat others in the same way they have been treated for thousands of years. There was a path to peace and the current Israeli Government share the blame equally for it not succeeding.
    I don’t disagree at all. But the issue is all this talk of “apartheid” misses the point in that Israel will always be an ethno-state or it is nothing. A one state solution cannot work because then it ceases to be the Jewish haven.
    Oh I agree with you on this. And again I have no problem with the state of Israel existing as a Jewish state (as long as they treat their minorities properly as well). But there has to be a Palestinian state as well. The West Bank and Gaza are not Israel and Israelis should not be settling them.
    If Jews are allowed to ask for an ethnostate, are white people allowed to ask for the same? Asking for a few friends
    Maybe when some nutter has wiped out 60% of the white population in Europe in less than a decade then people might start seeing us in the same light and give us a bit of desert to settle.

    Until then my considered advice, and I say this with all due regard for your massive intellect, would be stop being so fucking stupid.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554

    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    It such a BS argument. All they have to do is claim they are coming to visit Salisbury cathedral....

    That been said the Iranians agents into the UK via small boats.
    I’m surprised they bothered with the small boats.

    There’s plenty of yachts making a bit of extra cash with the deluxe version of small boats.

    Not to mention light aircraft.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,961
    edited April 10

    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    It such a BS argument. All they have to do is claim they are coming to visit Salisbury cathedral....

    That been said the Iranians agents into the UK via small boats.
    I’m surprised they bothered with the small boats.

    There’s plenty of yachts making a bit of extra cash with the deluxe version of small boats.

    Not to mention light aircraft.
    They had claimed asylum, getting the tax payer board and lodging, while waiting to be activated.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 89,694
    The Swalwell spy story was bullshit.
    This, however, might have rather more substance.

    Former staffer says Rep. Eric Swalwell, candidate for California governor, sexually assaulted her
    https://x.com/SophiaBollag/status/2042698416959164904

    His candidacy is done, I think.
    https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/10/swalwell-campaign-imploding-amid-sexual-assault-allegation-00867619

  • DumbosaurusDumbosaurus Posts: 1,065

    https://x.com/i_ammukhtar/status/2042587057910878631

    It’s actually wild that Nigel Farage thought nobody would notice that the couple who won his energy bills prize draw were actually his friends.

    Is there anything honest about Farage?

    Actually it's probably a sign that it was a genuine draw. Party activists will have been disproportionately likely to a) know about it and b) get tickets, so it's not surprising if one of them was the winner.
    I - as someone who is more anti Reform with every policy entered cause a) it was free so why on earth wouldn't I want free money b) if we did win it would be hilarious to not just have free money but to have free money from someone I'll happily call a front bum on camera, the entire street hates him even though that might not be expected to someone without very local knowledge.

    But I agree with your general point, most don't think like me and this is more or less what you'd expect to happen.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,516
    carnforth said:

    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    Probably 12 genuine seafarers and 2 agents though. If we can tell them apart we could let the seafarers defect.

    (Are we allowed defectors now? Or do we have to lump them in with economic migrants?)
    Yes, but you're putting agents on a ship, where they have to mingle with actual sailors without getting caught (because you don't want Genuine Sailor Victor saying to the authorities "yes, Vlad said he was a sailor, but knew nothing about correct way to store rope on ship".)

    And there's also the very real risk the British don't stop and board the ship, and then what?
  • DumbosaurusDumbosaurus Posts: 1,065

    Seems like this ban, possession of such material by the letter of the law will be a pretty serious offence along the choking stuff, is not just the production of it.

    The whole extreme porn ban was the beginning of a ridiculous slippery slope that ends up somewhere where all porn is illegal, in which case a child porn conviction* becomes seen as meaning "was in a Whatsapp group with rugby players / MET police officers" and becomes ignored. Utter morons.

    *Yes I know it's technically a different law
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 56,870
    PJH said:

    Nominations in Havant are interesting - each ward has 1 Reform, 1 Tory and 1 of Labour/LD/Green, who are each standing in 4 out of 12 wards! A clear anti-Reform alliance there? Is anyone in Hampshire able to shed any light on it?

    I note some interesting patterns on the IOW, though not quite that blatent.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,961
    edited April 10
    People adept at video games should consider taking jobs as air traffic controllers, the US government has said, as it tries to address a shortage of workers in the sector.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce84rvx0e6do

    Well we have had Big Balls responsible for cutting whole government departments, now we will have Sweaty Balls directing the air traffic....
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 66,619
    nico67 said:

    nico67 said:

    carnforth said:

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    Doesn't make her a good candidate, or a good president though.
    I’d happily vote for her . She did her best in 2024 given the circumstances . I very much doubt she’ll get the nomination anyway .
    You want someone to do better than her best and someone who can restore the US in the international community

    Harris is not that person
    At this point anyone with a shred of humanity and a brain that works could do that . I don’t accept Harris was a bad candidate.
    She absolutely wasn't.

    If you were a Republican.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 66,619

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    This is all quite mad.
  • AnthonyTAnthonyT Posts: 259
    edited April 10
    Sort of on topic, the Islamic Republic of Iran (which has as one of its stated aims the destruction of Israel - a genocidal policy right there) has just been nominated to the U.N. Committee for Program and Coordination, which meets soon to shape policy on women's rights, human rights, disarmament, and terrorism prevention.

    Britain supported Iran's membership .

    Some posters may remember that a few weeks back Starmer made a long speech detailing all the many awful things Iran was doing in Britain, including being behind terrorist plots against Britain. Unlike every other European country, Britain has taken no action against the IRGC.

    Iran has in the last day or so executed a 16 year old boy who was demonstrating for his freedom. His name was Mohammad Hossein Shokri. Young women have also been executed; they are raped before being hanged. Female demonstrators have had their eyes targeted by those shooting at them. There has been virtually no outcry or demos against the evil Iran perpetrates by those so quick to take to the streets over Israel's conduct. Odd that. It's as if their demos are motivated by something other than adherence to a principled belief in human rights.

    Quite why Britain thinks Iran has any sort of worthwhile contribution to the development of policy on women's rights, human rights, disarmament and terrorism prevention is hard to tell. Perhaps the PM will tell us in his next speech.

    Or maybe it's really all about oil. And appeasement of fascists. It wouldn't be the first time Britain has done this, of course.
  • DumbosaurusDumbosaurus Posts: 1,065
    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    My brother is super yacht crew, I'm fairly hazy on the details as when we're discussing stories I'm more about the arms dealers, cocaine and prostitutes but it's my understanding seamen can in most countries regardless of normal visa rules just get off and leave anyway as long as they stay reasonably close under some convention or something. Presumably applies to tankers too.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 66,619
    kle4 said:

    I kind of feel for Starmer on this one. Not that I supported the Chagos Bill (the moralistic argument was underwhelming considering neither we nor Mauritius cared about the Chagossians, and the technical legal argument seemed a bit thin, and it's all just about who lets the USA have a base there anyway), but opponents were begging Trump to withdraw support as he came into office and he didn't, then he said he might, then didnt again, do Starmer has just been jerked about.

    What I'm not clear on is what that means legally.

    I seem to recall we've already signed the treaty with Mauritius.

    So is this now agreed in international law but not just in domestic law, so Mauritius won't get any payments, but might be sort of sovereign anyway, and BIOT in some sort of limbo?

    It's all very messy.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 61,140

    kle4 said:

    I kind of feel for Starmer on this one. Not that I supported the Chagos Bill (the moralistic argument was underwhelming considering neither we nor Mauritius cared about the Chagossians, and the technical legal argument seemed a bit thin, and it's all just about who lets the USA have a base there anyway), but opponents were begging Trump to withdraw support as he came into office and he didn't, then he said he might, then didnt again, do Starmer has just been jerked about.

    What I'm not clear on is what that means legally.

    I seem to recall we've already signed the treaty with Mauritius.

    So is this now agreed in international law but not just in domestic law, so Mauritius won't get any payments, but might be sort of sovereign anyway, and BIOT in some sort of limbo?

    It's all very messy.
    Without the legislation the treaty is not ratified. No ratifications means status quo ante.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 24,240
    Artemis II has accelerated to over 8,500 mph as it approaches Earth for a splashdown due at 01:07 BST.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 15,649
    AnthonyT said:

    Sort of on topic, the Islamic Republic of Iran (which has as one of its stated aims the destruction of Israel - a genocidal policy right there) has just been nominated to the U.N. Committee for Program and Coordination, which meets soon to shape policy on women's rights, human rights, disarmament, and terrorism prevention.

    Britain supported Iran's membership .

    Some posters may remember that a few weeks back Starmer made a long speech detailing all the many awful things Iran was doing in Britain, including being behind terrorist plots against Britain. Unlike every other European country, Britain has taken no action against the IRGC.

    Iran has in the last day or so executed a 16 year old boy who was demonstrating for his freedom. His name was Mohammad Hossein Shokri. Young women have also been executed; they are raped before being hanged. Female demonstrators have had their eyes targeted by those shooting at them. There has been virtually no outcry or demos against the evil Iran perpetrates by those so quick to take to the streets over Israel's conduct. Odd that. It's as if their demos are motivated by something other than adherence to a principled belief in human rights.

    Quite why Britain thinks Iran has any sort of worthwhile contribution to the development of policy on women's rights, human rights, disarmament and terrorism prevention is hard to tell. Perhaps the PM will tell us in his next speech.

    Or maybe it's really all about oil. And appeasement of fascists. It wouldn't be the first time Britain has done this, of course.

    Saturday morning is the usual time for trolling on PB.

    You are a little early.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 91,961

    Artemis II has accelerated to over 8,500 mph as it approaches Earth for a splashdown due at 01:07 BST.

    I hope that wasn't going over Wales, exceeding the 20mph speed limit by that much will be a hell of a fine...
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 66,619

    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    It such a BS argument. All they have to do is claim they are coming to visit Salisbury cathedral....

    That been said the Iranians agents into the UK via small boats.
    I suspect the Russians are rather good at positioning themselves so they can get British forces and security agencies to tie themselves up in knots through our own legal webs and treaties. Lawfare is much easier and less risky than warfare.

    They aren't fools.
  • DumbosaurusDumbosaurus Posts: 1,065
    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    I kind of feel for Starmer on this one. Not that I supported the Chagos Bill (the moralistic argument was underwhelming considering neither we nor Mauritius cared about the Chagossians, and the technical legal argument seemed a bit thin, and it's all just about who lets the USA have a base there anyway), but opponents were begging Trump to withdraw support as he came into office and he didn't, then he said he might, then didnt again, do Starmer has just been jerked about.

    What I'm not clear on is what that means legally.

    I seem to recall we've already signed the treaty with Mauritius.

    So is this now agreed in international law but not just in domestic law, so Mauritius won't get any payments, but might be sort of sovereign anyway, and BIOT in some sort of limbo?

    It's all very messy.
    Without the legislation the treaty is not ratified. No ratifications means status quo ante.
    As anyone who's looked up a big international treaty on Wikipedia and seen the pretty map knows, signing, ratification, and accession are different things :smile:
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 66,619
    RobD said:

    kle4 said:

    I kind of feel for Starmer on this one. Not that I supported the Chagos Bill (the moralistic argument was underwhelming considering neither we nor Mauritius cared about the Chagossians, and the technical legal argument seemed a bit thin, and it's all just about who lets the USA have a base there anyway), but opponents were begging Trump to withdraw support as he came into office and he didn't, then he said he might, then didnt again, do Starmer has just been jerked about.

    What I'm not clear on is what that means legally.

    I seem to recall we've already signed the treaty with Mauritius.

    So is this now agreed in international law but not just in domestic law, so Mauritius won't get any payments, but might be sort of sovereign anyway, and BIOT in some sort of limbo?

    It's all very messy.
    Without the legislation the treaty is not ratified. No ratifications means status quo ante.
    I hope that's correct.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 15,649

    Artemis II has accelerated to over 8,500 mph as it approaches Earth for a splashdown due at 01:07 BST.

    What are the chances of Israel shooting it down accidentally...or deliberately even?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,435
    PJH said:

    Nominations in Havant are interesting - each ward has 1 Reform, 1 Tory and 1 of Labour/LD/Green, who are each standing in 4 out of 12 wards! A clear anti-Reform alliance there? Is anyone in Hampshire able to shed any light on it?

    Havant council is currently being run by a joint Labour-LibDem-Green coalition, so they have clearly decided to carry their coalition into the elections. Probably the only chance those Labour councillors had of retaining their seats, although if the Labour Party applies its rules they are likely in a lot of trouble with HQ….
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 56,870

    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    It such a BS argument. All they have to do is claim they are coming to visit Salisbury cathedral....

    That been said the Iranians agents into the UK via small boats.
    I suspect the Russians are rather good at positioning themselves so they can get British forces and security agencies to tie themselves up in knots through our own legal webs and treaties. Lawfare is much easier and less risky than warfare.

    They aren't fools.
    The Russians have no need to enter on small boats, or even large ones.

    They have enough friends in high places to be clothed with ermine.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,435
    Foxy said:

    PJH said:

    Nominations in Havant are interesting - each ward has 1 Reform, 1 Tory and 1 of Labour/LD/Green, who are each standing in 4 out of 12 wards! A clear anti-Reform alliance there? Is anyone in Hampshire able to shed any light on it?

    I note some interesting patterns on the IOW, though not quite that blatent.
    Not sure that I see any. Labour is only fighting 17 wards and the LibDems 14, so they could easily have stayed out of each other’s way, but that’s not how it’s fallen. I think both struggled to find candidates and have simply put people up locally where they can
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 13,451
    Ratters said:

    I think we'd be better off if Palestine was absorbed into its neighbouring Arab nations:

    - As a part of Israel, both the West Bank and especially Gasa are treated horrendously. Of course in the latter case there's two sides to things, but Israel's response to October 7th went so far past the line that looking back it looks like a dot. Israel is never going to be a fair and just ruler of this land.

    - The two state solution is seemingly dead and I'm not sure there's any way to revive it. Israel won't allow Gaza, in particular, the power and rights of a nation state.

    - Israel will never let Palestinians be equal citizens within the wider borders of Israel.

    - So absorbing them into Egypt and Jordan would allow the Palestinians to have equal rights within a country to other citizens. It's not an independent Palestine, but the example of Kurdistan is a better one than the seats quo.

    Egypt and Jordan don’t want them. The Palestinians tried to overthrow the Jordanian monarchy after the ‘67 war. Not sure specifically about Egypt but there is no love lost
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,516

    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    It such a BS argument. All they have to do is claim they are coming to visit Salisbury cathedral....

    That been said the Iranians agents into the UK via small boats.
    I’m surprised they bothered with the small boats.

    There’s plenty of yachts making a bit of extra cash with the deluxe version of small boats.

    Not to mention light aircraft.
    It's very easy to get people in by boat. A boat leaves Dover, picks up someone in the Channel, and then returns to Dover.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 55,435
    Total number of candidates, by party, local council elections:

    LAB: 4,882 (96.7%)
    RFM: 4,801 (95.1%)
    CON: 4,752 (94.2%)
    GRN: 4,446 (88.1%)
    LD: 3,929 (77.8%)
    TUSC: 284 (5.6%)
    WPB: 72 (1.4%)
    SDP: 48 (1.0%)

    Inds: 861
    Localists: 572

    Reform has however managed to put someone up in almost every ward- the highest contested wards at 99.9% - a remarkable achievement for a party with no real local government track record. I expect there are some real duds in that crowd….
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 59,819

    Foxy said:

    Uh Oh, he's awake and trying to provoke a @TSE header...

    “RANKED-CHOICE VOTING IS ONE OF THE GREATEST THREATS TO DEMOCRACY, and every single Alaskan should support the effort to repeal it once and for all.”

    https://bsky.app/profile/paleofuture.bsky.social/post/3mj64toqg6c2y

    This is why people should back AV, if you don't then you're on the same side as Donald Trump.
    Your heart-throb David Cameron doesn't believe in AV!

  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 4,849

    Artemis II has accelerated to over 8,500 mph as it approaches Earth for a splashdown due at 01:07 BST.

    CAAAAAANOOOON BAAAALLLL!
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 63,554
    edited April 10
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    It such a BS argument. All they have to do is claim they are coming to visit Salisbury cathedral....

    That been said the Iranians agents into the UK via small boats.
    I’m surprised they bothered with the small boats.

    There’s plenty of yachts making a bit of extra cash with the deluxe version of small boats.

    Not to mention light aircraft.
    It's very easy to get people in by boat. A boat leaves Dover, picks up someone in the Channel, and then returns to Dover.

    Not even that. Cruise into a small French port. Have lunch. Cruise back. Very easy to accidentally have more people on board, on the return. Very few checks.

    Same with light aircraft. Fly to a grass airfield in France. Have lunch. Some places, no checks.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 136,924
    edited April 10
    IanB2 said:

    Total number of candidates, by party, local council elections:

    LAB: 4,882 (96.7%)
    RFM: 4,801 (95.1%)
    CON: 4,752 (94.2%)
    GRN: 4,446 (88.1%)
    LD: 3,929 (77.8%)
    TUSC: 284 (5.6%)
    WPB: 72 (1.4%)
    SDP: 48 (1.0%)

    Inds: 861
    Localists: 572

    Reform has however managed to put someone up in almost every ward- the highest contested wards at 99.9% - a remarkable achievement for a party with no real local government track record. I expect there are some real duds in that crowd….

    Restore meanwhile have managed just 9 candidates, all in Great Yarmouth and less than half even than the 21 candidates Your Party are standing
    https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1shuz6k/list_of_parties_running_in_the_local_elections/
  • Chagos has gone so surely everyone is happy right?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,388


    Acyn
    @Acyn
    ·
    9m
    Reporter: What would a good deal look like for you?

    Trump: No nuclear weapon. I think it’s already been regime change, but we never had that as a criteria. No nuclear weapon, that is 99%.

    Reporter: The strait as well?

    Trump: That will open up automatically

    https://x.com/Acyn/status/2042714930433200261


    Incredible. We never mentioned regime change, no siree. Never a word. They wont have nukes. Yes they do. The strait will just magically open up as they wont make any money.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 72,388
    Trump on Iran: "the whole place is gone"

    Meanwhile, maybe four ships passed through the Straits today.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814
    edited April 10
    PJH said:

    Nominations in Havant are interesting - each ward has 1 Reform, 1 Tory and 1 of Labour/LD/Green, who are each standing in 4 out of 12 wards! A clear anti-Reform alliance there? Is anyone in Hampshire able to shed any light on it?

    That does seem a remarkable coincidence. But if one party had someone wanting to stand, and were told no as part of tactical alliances, they would probably stand on their own.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814



    Acyn
    @Acyn
    ·
    9m
    Reporter: What would a good deal look like for you?

    Trump: No nuclear weapon. I think it’s already been regime change, but we never had that as a criteria. No nuclear weapon, that is 99%.

    Reporter: The strait as well?

    Trump: That will open up automatically

    https://x.com/Acyn/status/2042714930433200261


    Incredible. We never mentioned regime change, no siree. Never a word. They wont have nukes. Yes they do. The strait will just magically open up as they wont make any money.

    How in his head has there 'already been regime change'? I know there's a new Supreme Leader, but come on.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 20,986
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
    She did have some skills to be fair to her persuading the rich of her brilliance and her great ideas for the nation.

    Harris was the first Democratic presidential nominee ever to win US voters earning over $100,000 a year, beating Trump 51% to 47% with those high earners.

    Unfortunately her skills passed ordinary voters who decide US elections by, Kamala lost US voters with household incomes under $100,000 by 51% to 47% and Trump even managed to beat her with voters earning below the average US income and less than $50,000 a year 50% to 48%.

    Indeed she was so disconnected from Main Street compared to the woke coastal rich she managed to win 52% of the highest earning voters earning over $200,000 a year but just 50% of the poorest voters earning under $30,000 a year

    https://edition.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0
    Those aren't margins much beyond MOE.
    Almost as if income was virtually irrelevant as a predictor of voting patterns.
    Certainly when compared to age, gender, rural/urban, education level, race and a host of other metrics.
    It isn't, the pattern is global income and social class is back in a big way as a predictor of voting intentions and increasingly it is the liberal left parties doing best amongst the rich and high earners and that applies here too. So a reverse of the 20th century when Labour and leftwing parties did best amongst the poor and working class voters and centre right parties did best amongst higher earners and the rich. For the populist nationalist right parties which have overtaken the centre right have voting blocks closer to the traditional left of centre voting white working class and the left liberals often win high earners who used to vote centre right.

    Labour and the LDs do best now amongst the wealthy and high earners, as does Macron and his party in France and the Canadian Liberals and Australian Labor. Whereas Trump, Le Pen and her party, Farage and Reform and One Nation poll much better amongst working class voters.

    Age was a divide between Tory and Labour but class is a big divide between Labour and Reform and of course in Tory v Reform contests class is the predictor
    Indeed Harris was just 1% behind Trump amongst voters over 65 while Harris beat Trump by a wider 6% margin amongst voters earning over $200 000. Harris only beat voters by 4% amongst voters aged 30-44, while Trump beat Harris by 2% amongst voters earning under $50,000
    All of which are fairly small differences,
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814
    IanB2 said:

    Total number of candidates, by party, local council elections:

    LAB: 4,882 (96.7%)
    RFM: 4,801 (95.1%)
    CON: 4,752 (94.2%)
    GRN: 4,446 (88.1%)
    LD: 3,929 (77.8%)
    TUSC: 284 (5.6%)
    WPB: 72 (1.4%)
    SDP: 48 (1.0%)

    Inds: 861
    Localists: 572

    Reform has however managed to put someone up in almost every ward- the highest contested wards at 99.9% - a remarkable achievement for a party with no real local government track record. I expect there are some real duds in that crowd….

    Undoubtedly, but when you get into the 80/90s there always is!

    Lots of spouses and partners roped in too.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 56,870
    IanB2 said:

    Foxy said:

    PJH said:

    Nominations in Havant are interesting - each ward has 1 Reform, 1 Tory and 1 of Labour/LD/Green, who are each standing in 4 out of 12 wards! A clear anti-Reform alliance there? Is anyone in Hampshire able to shed any light on it?

    I note some interesting patterns on the IOW, though not quite that blatent.
    Not sure that I see any. Labour is only fighting 17 wards and the LibDems 14, so they could easily have stayed out of each other’s way, but that’s not how it’s fallen. I think both struggled to find candidates and have simply put people up locally where they can
    Virtually every seat has both Con and Ref, but there do not seem to be many with the full slate of other parties. I am not sure quite how the various Independents line up. Very often there is only one of Lab/LD/G

    https://onthewight.com/see-who-is-running-in-your-ward-for-the-isle-of-wight-council-elections/#candidates

    No election for me in Leics
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 103,814
    HYUFD said:

    IanB2 said:

    Total number of candidates, by party, local council elections:

    LAB: 4,882 (96.7%)
    RFM: 4,801 (95.1%)
    CON: 4,752 (94.2%)
    GRN: 4,446 (88.1%)
    LD: 3,929 (77.8%)
    TUSC: 284 (5.6%)
    WPB: 72 (1.4%)
    SDP: 48 (1.0%)

    Inds: 861
    Localists: 572

    Reform has however managed to put someone up in almost every ward- the highest contested wards at 99.9% - a remarkable achievement for a party with no real local government track record. I expect there are some real duds in that crowd….

    Restore meanwhile have managed just 9 candidates, all in Great Yarmouth and less than half even than the 21 candidates Your Party are standing
    https://www.reddit.com/r/LabourUK/comments/1shuz6k/list_of_parties_running_in_the_local_elections/
    Restore don't look like a serious operation to me, and exist purely as one of several vehicles for people who fell out with Farage, and received attention just as their name was better than some of the others as well as close to Reform.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 64,516

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    A compelling enough reason to withdraw from the asylum conventions?

    https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/2042687812252668116

    Keir Starmer has yet to authorise the seizure of Russian tankers in the English Channel over fears the sailors will be able to claim asylum

    It's thought that Putin has sent agents on board so they can spy on Britain from within

    Isn't that a fairly convaluted way to get someone into Britain? I would have thought that Russian intelligence services would have done a decent job of getting their operatives passports from other countries.
    It such a BS argument. All they have to do is claim they are coming to visit Salisbury cathedral....

    That been said the Iranians agents into the UK via small boats.
    I’m surprised they bothered with the small boats.

    There’s plenty of yachts making a bit of extra cash with the deluxe version of small boats.

    Not to mention light aircraft.
    It's very easy to get people in by boat. A boat leaves Dover, picks up someone in the Channel, and then returns to Dover.

    Not even that. Cruise into a small French port. Have lunch. Cruise back. Very easy to accidentally have more people on board, on the return. Very few checks.

    Same with light aircraft. Fly to a grass airfield in France. Have lunch. Some places, no checks.
    When I flew out of Denham, people would go to Le Touquet all the time for lunch. When you were doing these, and you filed your flight plan, you were supposed to list all the people on the plane, with passport numbers and the like. It was theoretically possible that you would be met by Immigration officials on your return, but my guess is that it was incredibly rare.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 136,924
    edited April 10

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    nico67 said:

    https://x.com/politico/status/2042639770476552489

    BREAKING: Kamala Harris just gave the clearest signal yet she’ll run for president again in 2028.

    Everything she said would happen if Trump was elected has .

    She was proven right .
    A politician's most important skill is to persuade.

    Harris is not blessed in that regard.

    If she does run again I hope that she will lose in the Primaries.
    She did have some skills to be fair to her persuading the rich of her brilliance and her great ideas for the nation.

    Harris was the first Democratic presidential nominee ever to win US voters earning over $100,000 a year, beating Trump 51% to 47% with those high earners.

    Unfortunately her skills passed ordinary voters who decide US elections by, Kamala lost US voters with household incomes under $100,000 by 51% to 47% and Trump even managed to beat her with voters earning below the average US income and less than $50,000 a year 50% to 48%.

    Indeed she was so disconnected from Main Street compared to the woke coastal rich she managed to win 52% of the highest earning voters earning over $200,000 a year but just 50% of the poorest voters earning under $30,000 a year

    https://edition.cnn.com/election/2024/exit-polls/national-results/general/president/0
    Those aren't margins much beyond MOE.
    Almost as if income was virtually irrelevant as a predictor of voting patterns.
    Certainly when compared to age, gender, rural/urban, education level, race and a host of other metrics.
    It isn't, the pattern is global income and social class is back in a big way as a predictor of voting intentions and increasingly it is the liberal left parties doing best amongst the rich and high earners and that applies here too. So a reverse of the 20th century when Labour and leftwing parties did best amongst the poor and working class voters and centre right parties did best amongst higher earners and the rich. For the populist nationalist right parties which have overtaken the centre right have voting blocks closer to the traditional left of centre voting white working class and the left liberals often win high earners who used to vote centre right.

    Labour and the LDs do best now amongst the wealthy and high earners, as does Macron and his party in France and the Canadian Liberals and Australian Labor. Whereas Trump, Le Pen and her party, Farage and Reform and One Nation poll much better amongst working class voters.

    Age was a divide between Tory and Labour but class is a big divide between Labour and Reform and of course in Tory v Reform contests class is the predictor
    Indeed Harris was just 1% behind Trump amongst voters over 65 while Harris beat Trump by a wider 6% margin amongst voters earning over $200 000. Harris only beat voters by 4% amongst voters aged 30-44, while Trump beat Harris by 2% amongst voters earning under $50,000
    All of which are fairly small differences,
    Nonetheless it puts paid to the lie age is the key determinant in how voters vote in the West now.

    It may be that age is the key voting indicator when putting leftwing parties against centre right parties still, as it was here when Corbyn faced Boris and May but when left liberal parties face nationalist right parties the key factor is class.

    Indeed Macron won pensioners in France in 2022 as did Carney in Canada last year and Harris nearly won over 65s in the US but Le Pen won white working class voters, as did Polievre and as did Trump. Here Reform also have their biggest lead over Labour and the Tories and Greens amongst working class voters but amongst pensioners they can only tie the Tories for the lead and in fact do better amongst 50-65s
This discussion has been closed.