All three statements are undoubtedly true. But is there a (recent) context for statement one?
So the Reform council in Essex has taken down the flag of Ukraine from the council HQ.
James Cleverly criticised it.
Here's one of Farage's top aides defending it
If you were wondering why the Conservative Party just suffered its worst defeat in Essex - and why it will cease to exist there after the next general election - look no further.
The Tories spent 14 years treating the national interest as one priority among many.
Nadhim Zahawi retweeted it and other comments defending the decisions and wrote this
No one disagrees that we should remain steadfast in our support of the brave Ukrainians. I still believe that public services should be focused on delivery for the British people & our flag is a proud reminder of who we prioritise.
His former colleagues are calling out his pro-Putinism
Reform being so openly hostile to Britain’s support for Ukraine is one of the most off-putting things about them.
Flying the flag of a free and sovereign Ukraine is a mark of our upholding their right to exist as a nation in the face of the murder, rape and pillage of Putin’s unprovoked invasion.
Doing so does not detract from or diminish Britain’s national interest. It enhances it. We have a clear national interest in the defence of Europe, and not emboldening further Russian aggression.
I am also astonished to see @nadhimzahawi retweeting what Mr Orr posted. He, like me, served in the Cabinet of @BorisJohnson.
He, like me, knows how critical Britain’s military and moral support has been to preventing a Russian conquest. He used to believe in these things.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
Bollocks.
The outrage is the Reform traitors saying that helping Ukraine isn't in the UK's national interest and the top priority for the UK in so many ways.
I am looking forward to the end of the era of performative emoting via flag. It will at the very least save on flags.
How do you feel about a Union flag and a flag of St George ( getting tattier and more ragged by the day) on the lampposts of Worcestershire at the ratepayers' expense?
If it cost the ratepayers money to have them put up, it will clearly cost them money to have them taken down. The weather will reduce them to strings free of charge!
Forever fibres polluting the streets, ending up in soil, holding sludge together to block drains.
How the myth that Labour have done nothing in 2 years became fixed in the minds of voters .
A relentless anti Labour campaign by the media and poor No 10 communications culminated in where we are today.
It isn't the task of the media to be a PR company for any government. This government has been terrible at communications, and especially the art of communicating convincingly by answering questions and not being evasive.
also terrible decision making. Sacking Robbins and then clinging on....
I think that is largely correct.
But neither is it the job of Allister Heath and Allison Pearson to represent fiction as fact. The job of the Telegraph ( and GB News and Talk TV) is to report the news objectively not to use smoke and mirrors to roll the pitch for the next Government in 3,4,5 years time. One could argue a competent Government should have the wherewithal to call out and correct inaccuracies, but it seems this one didn't.
Starmer is wholly to blame for this.
Largely agree, but there is no such thing as objective news coverage. They could all try harder to separate fact and opinion. So we have to rely on an open free media.
There are loads of outlets who would reasonably fairly but critically report on Labour doing well. Mirror, Guardian, FT, New Statesman, Economist, Ch4, ITV, BBC, Times to some extent, vast numbers on X and other social media. An infinity of podcasts.
As to the Right Wing media, in general they gave the Tories a hard time in government IIRC. I find it hard to follow because it's unreadable.
Whereas I accept there will be a bias when reporting news, any news, it is the out and out lies I was objecting to.
It's like giving a false equivalent to reporting by Rachel Maddows and. Jesse Watters. Maddows takes a story, reports the story and opines from the left. Jesse Watters ignores any story but just makes stuff up with no basis upon fact, to promote his cause, which is invariably Trump.
Largely agree. I think in this particular age the prevalence of lies is going to be a reality and unavoidable. I imagine most people just avoid wasting much time on lying outlets. I think everyone knows that in a social media age you have the same sort of duty towards fact checking and lie detection that you do towards locking your front door when you go on holiday.
In outlets regarded as responsible (there are lots) the principle distortion is done by story selection. Take the BBC, which I greatly admire. They would, I think, never run a series, fully researched, to try to demonstrate all the ways in which people manipulate and abuse the benefits and welfare system. Or do detailed case studies on how particular families spend years and generations doing little at our expense. (The sort of project the odious Matt Goodwin would be fond of). But they are never short of super people who are going to suffer egregiously from any change in the system.
The BBC are to an extent even more pernicious. Providing false equivalence is unforgivable. Giving equal billing to the Chairman of the World Bank and Andrea Leadsom to determine the economic effects of Brexit was outrageous. The BBC were also great exponents of the Minford Paradigm. Once again providing a disreputable but largely hidden false equivalence. Theyveould take their pick of any one of 1,000 economists who would maintain Brexit was an economic disaster against Patrick Minford, who was the only one who thought Brexit would be great.
Yet it hasn't been an economic disaster, nor anything resembling one, as has been demonstrated amply by some very good recent thread headers that I must have missed your rebbutal of. So Leadsom was more accurate than the Head of the World Bank, which rather seems to vindicate her being platformed.
In some authorities when the officers do all the thinking its a Bad Thing. Probably not in Birmingham. Have the councillors just sit there throwing bread rolls at each other and let the officers actually run the council...
What makes you think Birmingham's budget will stretch to bread rolls?
How the myth that Labour have done nothing in 2 years became fixed in the minds of voters .
A relentless anti Labour campaign by the media and poor No 10 communications culminated in where we are today.
Good morning
They certainly haven't done nothing
As I said yesterday an old friend popped in to invite us to his 80th
He is a successful North Wales businessman who said Reeves NI and minimum wage increaseshas added £100,000 pa to his restaurant costs so much so he is cutting hours, staff who in hospitality are generally young, reviewing his menus, and increasing prices, but he is uncertain just how sustainable his restaurant is
Labour haven't a clue about businees and just destroy jobs and opportunities especially for the young
And on Burnham I am not at all sure he will win and if he doesn't goodness knows what happens to labour, indeed even if he does looking at the bond markets he may have a very short honeymoon
So his complaint is that he has to pay his workers more - that’s not a great look really
It’s not about look.
It’s about reality. If he puts prices up to cover increasing wage costs, then less and less people will eat in his resteraunt.
Very easy to get into the downslope - less people at a higher price is less profitable, so prices have to go up And up. Or go out of business.
Bet you’ll be upset when a meal out costs £100 a head, before alcohol. But that is where we are heading. You can draw the lines on a graph.
I’ll be upset at gross exaggeration first. I had a fantastic Japanese meal last night, in London, including one of the most expensive things in the menu, and it came to about £85 for two. We are not heading to £100 a head.
Look up some reviews of hospitality industry which include price inflation. It is a long way ahead of RPI, CPI or any other measure you want to use.
It has been for a while - especially since COVID.
And there is no sign of it slowing down.
It will take some time, but the end result is inevitable.
Decades in the future when inflation means £100 then doesn’t mean what £100 now means. This is just silly scaremongering. You can make your point without such pecuniary hyperbole.
If prices are increasing above inflation and wages, then affordability goes down.
This is mathematics at work.
One of the reasons that chunks of the population are really upset is that they see themselves, increasingly, priced out of things that they used to do.
See? I knew you could make your point without pecuniary hyperbole.
The £100 is about quantifying how that will feel, to the poor bloody peasant who is trying to dine out.
The poor bloody peasants are the ones working in the restaurant, not the ones eating in it.
And a fair bit of this is just getting old. I know that calibrating 'the fair price of a restaurant meal' by the £5 Pierre Victorie charged for lunch in the 1990s is madness, but I don't necessarily grok that.
Anecdata point from this week.
I needed a treat so on Thursday I went to a good local gastropub (2.5k Google reviews, average 4.5 *) for lunch called the Carnarvon in Teversal, which is a bit of Nottinghamshire that looks like Derbyshire just before you get to Derbyshire (so local Councillors for here like living there). I'd call it mid-range - decent quality with some on site cookery, but many items brought in pre-prepared. I imagine my Creme Brulee was bought in and the sugar sprinkled and grilled on the spot.
Fixed prices were £20.95 2 courses, £24.95 3 courses. Plus drinks. That £20.95 is a clear adjustment from the obvious £19.95 price point. The clientele were business meetings, locals lunching (especially pensioners, mums etc), co-workers using laptops to coordinate in the pub lunch section, anniversaries (one group of 10).
They could push their prices a little and still do OK I think. But it has a longstanding good reputation.
ABC News has now taken all FiveThirtyEight articles completely offline. They now redirect to abcnews dot com/politics. A needless erasure of thousands of pages of knowledge. https://x.com/baseballot/status/2055309076209492208?s=20
BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. Costing Disney shareholders $$ b/c of their vindictiveness.
All three statements are undoubtedly true. But is there a (recent) context for statement one?
So the Reform council in Essex has taken down the flag of Ukraine from the council HQ.
James Cleverly criticised it.
Here's one of Farage's top aides defending it
If you were wondering why the Conservative Party just suffered its worst defeat in Essex - and why it will cease to exist there after the next general election - look no further.
The Tories spent 14 years treating the national interest as one priority among many.
Nadhim Zahawi retweeted it and other comments defending the decisions and wrote this
No one disagrees that we should remain steadfast in our support of the brave Ukrainians. I still believe that public services should be focused on delivery for the British people & our flag is a proud reminder of who we prioritise.
His former colleagues are calling out his pro-Putinism
Reform being so openly hostile to Britain’s support for Ukraine is one of the most off-putting things about them.
Flying the flag of a free and sovereign Ukraine is a mark of our upholding their right to exist as a nation in the face of the murder, rape and pillage of Putin’s unprovoked invasion.
Doing so does not detract from or diminish Britain’s national interest. It enhances it. We have a clear national interest in the defence of Europe, and not emboldening further Russian aggression.
I am also astonished to see @nadhimzahawi retweeting what Mr Orr posted. He, like me, served in the Cabinet of @BorisJohnson.
He, like me, knows how critical Britain’s military and moral support has been to preventing a Russian conquest. He used to believe in these things.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
Bollocks.
The outrage is the Reform traitors saying that helping Ukraine isn't in the UK's national interest and the top priority for the UK in so many ways.
I am looking forward to the end of the era of performative emoting via flag. It will at the very least save on flags.
How do you feel about a Union flag and a flag of St George ( getting tattier and more ragged by the day) on the lampposts of Worcestershire at the ratepayers' expense?
I see it as a peaceful protest that I have some sympathy with. In the long term, I would prefer flags to be reserved for flagpoles.
Why protest?
The Union flag tailights on a Mini are a celebration of its Britishness and is to be commended. Sticking a flag of St George on a lamppost in a Republican estate in West Belfast has anything but peaceful intent.
We don’t really do flags stuck up in peoples gardens or hanging from their houses unless it’s during big sporting events .
That has changed in recent years, British, English, Palestinian and Schmalzy Poppy flags are all visible on peoples houses and gardens within a couple of miles of me.
The lamp post zip-tie ones from last summer are pretty filthy and frayed now. I see this as allegorical of the decline of the country.
All three statements are undoubtedly true. But is there a (recent) context for statement one?
So the Reform council in Essex has taken down the flag of Ukraine from the council HQ.
James Cleverly criticised it.
Here's one of Farage's top aides defending it
If you were wondering why the Conservative Party just suffered its worst defeat in Essex - and why it will cease to exist there after the next general election - look no further.
The Tories spent 14 years treating the national interest as one priority among many.
Nadhim Zahawi retweeted it and other comments defending the decisions and wrote this
No one disagrees that we should remain steadfast in our support of the brave Ukrainians. I still believe that public services should be focused on delivery for the British people & our flag is a proud reminder of who we prioritise.
His former colleagues are calling out his pro-Putinism
Reform being so openly hostile to Britain’s support for Ukraine is one of the most off-putting things about them.
Flying the flag of a free and sovereign Ukraine is a mark of our upholding their right to exist as a nation in the face of the murder, rape and pillage of Putin’s unprovoked invasion.
Doing so does not detract from or diminish Britain’s national interest. It enhances it. We have a clear national interest in the defence of Europe, and not emboldening further Russian aggression.
I am also astonished to see @nadhimzahawi retweeting what Mr Orr posted. He, like me, served in the Cabinet of @BorisJohnson.
He, like me, knows how critical Britain’s military and moral support has been to preventing a Russian conquest. He used to believe in these things.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
Bollocks.
The outrage is the Reform traitors saying that helping Ukraine isn't in the UK's national interest and the top priority for the UK in so many ways.
I am looking forward to the end of the era of performative emoting via flag. It will at the very least save on flags.
How do you feel about a Union flag and a flag of St George ( getting tattier and more ragged by the day) on the lampposts of Worcestershire at the ratepayers' expense?
I see it as a peaceful protest that I have some sympathy with. In the long term, I would prefer flags to be reserved for flagpoles.
Why protest?
The Union flag tailights on a Mini are a celebration of its Britishness and is to be commended. Sticking a flag of St George on a lamppost in a Republican estate in West Belfast has anything but peaceful intent.
The flags on the lampposts in my village are tatty af now. They look grim
The last two Labour leaders have been London based. I like London, it’s awesome.
But I wonder if a leader not from London will make a positive impact just by the virtue of killing the idea that Labour is a southern party that doesn’t understand the north.
How the myth that Labour have done nothing in 2 years became fixed in the minds of voters .
A relentless anti Labour campaign by the media and poor No 10 communications culminated in where we are today.
Good morning
They certainly haven't done nothing
As I said yesterday an old friend popped in to invite us to his 80th
He is a successful North Wales businessman who said Reeves NI and minimum wage increaseshas added £100,000 pa to his restaurant costs so much so he is cutting hours, staff who in hospitality are generally young, reviewing his menus, and increasing prices, but he is uncertain just how sustainable his restaurant is
Labour haven't a clue about businees and just destroy jobs and opportunities especially for the young
And on Burnham I am not at all sure he will win and if he doesn't goodness knows what happens to labour, indeed even if he does looking at the bond markets he may have a very short honeymoon
So his complaint is that he has to pay his workers more - that’s not a great look really
It’s not about look.
It’s about reality. If he puts prices up to cover increasing wage costs, then less and less people will eat in his resteraunt.
Very easy to get into the downslope - less people at a higher price is less profitable, so prices have to go up And up. Or go out of business.
Bet you’ll be upset when a meal out costs £100 a head, before alcohol. But that is where we are heading. You can draw the lines on a graph.
I’ll be upset at gross exaggeration first. I had a fantastic Japanese meal last night, in London, including one of the most expensive things in the menu, and it came to about £85 for two. We are not heading to £100 a head.
Look up some reviews of hospitality industry which include price inflation. It is a long way ahead of RPI, CPI or any other measure you want to use.
It has been for a while - especially since COVID.
And there is no sign of it slowing down.
It will take some time, but the end result is inevitable.
Decades in the future when inflation means £100 then doesn’t mean what £100 now means. This is just silly scaremongering. You can make your point without such pecuniary hyperbole.
If prices are increasing above inflation and wages, then affordability goes down.
This is mathematics at work.
One of the reasons that chunks of the population are really upset is that they see themselves, increasingly, priced out of things that they used to do.
See? I knew you could make your point without pecuniary hyperbole.
The £100 is about quantifying how that will feel, to the poor bloody peasant who is trying to dine out.
The poor bloody peasants are the ones working in the restaurant, not the ones eating in it.
And a fair bit of this is just getting old. I know that calibrating 'the fair price of a restaurant meal' by the £5 Pierre Victorie charged for lunch in the 1990s is madness, but I don't necessarily grok that.
The Food Industry Inflation is measurable and real.
For extra fun - it hits harder at the lower end. It’s not quite “a tenner on a pub meal and a tenner on a Michelin starred place” - but there is a pattern.
Part of the discontent in society is that we going backwards on affordability of various things.
In my local Italian - central London - which is nice but nothing exceptional, it’s the best part of £20 for a pasta dish and £50-60 a head if you have two courses and a glass of wine. That’s enough that I’ve dramatically cut back dining out despite having a decent salary
We don’t really do flags stuck up in peoples gardens or hanging from their houses unless it’s during big sporting events .
That has changed in recent years, British, English, Palestinian and Schmalzy Poppy flags are all visible on peoples houses and gardens within a couple of miles of me.
The lamp post zip-tie ones from last summer are pretty filthy and frayed now. I see this as allegorical of the decline of the country.
National flags should only be flown during sporting events like the World Cup and Six Nations. They should only be flown until the clock strikes midnight until the next day they are required.
Flying flags for Ukraine against a common enemy, or France for "Je suis Charlie" or Palestine or Israel might be more problematic.
@HormuzLetter BREAKING: Trump to decide within the next 24 hours on major military action against Iran, with Israel receiving the final answer in the same window, per Channel 12. A senior Israeli official said the resumption of the war is "near" and Israel is preparing for "several days to several weeks" of fighting.
So cue announcement that he has pulled back from military action thanks to a new note from the Iranians passed by Pakistan which is worth considering, just in time for the markets to open on Monday.
@HormuzLetter BREAKING: Trump to decide within the next 24 hours on major military action against Iran, with Israel receiving the final answer in the same window, per Channel 12. A senior Israeli official said the resumption of the war is "near" and Israel is preparing for "several days to several weeks" of fighting.
So cue announcement that he has pulled back from military action thanks to a new note from the Iranians passed by Pakistan which is worth considering, just in time for the markets to open on Monday.
How the myth that Labour have done nothing in 2 years became fixed in the minds of voters .
A relentless anti Labour campaign by the media and poor No 10 communications culminated in where we are today.
Good morning
They certainly haven't done nothing
As I said yesterday an old friend popped in to invite us to his 80th
He is a successful North Wales businessman who said Reeves NI and minimum wage increaseshas added £100,000 pa to his restaurant costs so much so he is cutting hours, staff who in hospitality are generally young, reviewing his menus, and increasing prices, but he is uncertain just how sustainable his restaurant is
Labour haven't a clue about businees and just destroy jobs and opportunities especially for the young
And on Burnham I am not at all sure he will win and if he doesn't goodness knows what happens to labour, indeed even if he does looking at the bond markets he may have a very short honeymoon
So his complaint is that he has to pay his workers more - that’s not a great look really
It’s not about look.
It’s about reality. If he puts prices up to cover increasing wage costs, then less and less people will eat in his resteraunt.
Very easy to get into the downslope - less people at a higher price is less profitable, so prices have to go up And up. Or go out of business.
Bet you’ll be upset when a meal out costs £100 a head, before alcohol. But that is where we are heading. You can draw the lines on a graph.
I’ll be upset at gross exaggeration first. I had a fantastic Japanese meal last night, in London, including one of the most expensive things in the menu, and it came to about £85 for two. We are not heading to £100 a head.
Look up some reviews of hospitality industry which include price inflation. It is a long way ahead of RPI, CPI or any other measure you want to use.
It has been for a while - especially since COVID.
And there is no sign of it slowing down.
It will take some time, but the end result is inevitable.
Decades in the future when inflation means £100 then doesn’t mean what £100 now means. This is just silly scaremongering. You can make your point without such pecuniary hyperbole.
If prices are increasing above inflation and wages, then affordability goes down.
This is mathematics at work.
One of the reasons that chunks of the population are really upset is that they see themselves, increasingly, priced out of things that they used to do.
See? I knew you could make your point without pecuniary hyperbole.
The £100 is about quantifying how that will feel, to the poor bloody peasant who is trying to dine out.
The poor bloody peasants are the ones working in the restaurant, not the ones eating in it.
And a fair bit of this is just getting old. I know that calibrating 'the fair price of a restaurant meal' by the £5 Pierre Victorie charged for lunch in the 1990s is madness, but I don't necessarily grok that.
Anecdata point from this week.
I needed a treat so on Thursday I went to a good local gastropub (2.5k Google reviews, average 4.5 *) for lunch called the Carnarvon in Teversal, which is a bit of Nottinghamshire that looks like Derbyshire just before you get to Derbyshire (so local Councillors for here like living there). I'd call it mid-range - decent quality with some on site cookery, but many items brought in pre-prepared. I imagine my Creme Brulee was bought in and the sugar sprinkled and grilled on the spot.
Fixed prices were £20.95 2 courses, £24.95 3 courses. Plus drinks. That £20.95 is a clear adjustment from the obvious £19.95 price point. The clientele were business meetings, locals lunching (especially pensioners, mums etc), co-workers using laptops to coordinate in the pub lunch section, anniversaries (one group of 10).
They could push their prices a little and still do OK I think. But it has a longstanding good reputation.
Not bad considering I am now paying £20.20 for fish and chips and curry sauce as a takeaway!
@HormuzLetter BREAKING: Trump to decide within the next 24 hours on major military action against Iran, with Israel receiving the final answer in the same window, per Channel 12. A senior Israeli official said the resumption of the war is "near" and Israel is preparing for "several days to several weeks" of fighting.
So cue announcement that he has pulled back from military action thanks to a new note from the Iranians passed by Pakistan which is worth considering, just in time for the markets to open on Monday.
I think your timing is slightly off. At the very least those connected with the regime have to have the opportunity to buy or sell on the pre-market.
The last two Labour leaders have been London based. I like London, it’s awesome.
But I wonder if a leader not from London will make a positive impact just by the virtue of killing the idea that Labour is a southern party that doesn’t understand the north.
Prime ministers represent the country not a particular region. It doesn't matter where they're from, any more than it matters where they went to school.
What matters is that they have good judgement and good policies which they can implement
@HormuzLetter BREAKING: Trump to decide within the next 24 hours on major military action against Iran, with Israel receiving the final answer in the same window, per Channel 12. A senior Israeli official said the resumption of the war is "near" and Israel is preparing for "several days to several weeks" of fighting.
So cue announcement that he has pulled back from military action thanks to a new note from the Iranians passed by Pakistan which is worth considering, just in time for the markets to open on Monday.
Trump running out of money from the last insider trading grift?
The last two Labour leaders have been London based. I like London, it’s awesome.
But I wonder if a leader not from London will make a positive impact just by the virtue of killing the idea that Labour is a southern party that doesn’t understand the north.
I think it could help . Connecting with voters in the north is easier if you’ve lived their life experience . It’s not that politicians further south can’t empathise or don’t really care about the people’s lives in the north but it lacks that real connection if you know what I mean .
The last two Labour leaders have been London based. I like London, it’s awesome.
But I wonder if a leader not from London will make a positive impact just by the virtue of killing the idea that Labour is a southern party that doesn’t understand the north.
Ridiculous. Most of them live in north London don’t you know. Working class millionaires with expensive houses and public sector pensions paid for by the marks.
How the myth that Labour have done nothing in 2 years became fixed in the minds of voters .
A relentless anti Labour campaign by the media and poor No 10 communications culminated in where we are today.
It isn't the task of the media to be a PR company for any government. This government has been terrible at communications, and especially the art of communicating convincingly by answering questions and not being evasive.
also terrible decision making. Sacking Robbins and then clinging on....
I think that is largely correct.
But neither is it the job of Allister Heath and Allison Pearson to represent fiction as fact. The job of the Telegraph ( and GB News and Talk TV) is to report the news objectively not to use smoke and mirrors to roll the pitch for the next Government in 3,4,5 years time. One could argue a competent Government should have the wherewithal to call out and correct inaccuracies, but it seems this one didn't.
Starmer is wholly to blame for this.
Largely agree, but there is no such thing as objective news coverage. They could all try harder to separate fact and opinion. So we have to rely on an open free media.
There are loads of outlets who would reasonably fairly but critically report on Labour doing well. Mirror, Guardian, FT, New Statesman, Economist, Ch4, ITV, BBC, Times to some extent, vast numbers on X and other social media. An infinity of podcasts.
As to the Right Wing media, in general they gave the Tories a hard time in government IIRC. I find it hard to follow because it's unreadable.
Whereas I accept there will be a bias when reporting news, any news, it is the out and out lies I was objecting to.
It's like giving a false equivalent to reporting by Rachel Maddows and. Jesse Watters. Maddows takes a story, reports the story and opines from the left. Jesse Watters ignores any story but just makes stuff up with no basis upon fact, to promote his cause, which is invariably Trump.
Largely agree. I think in this particular age the prevalence of lies is going to be a reality and unavoidable. I imagine most people just avoid wasting much time on lying outlets. I think everyone knows that in a social media age you have the same sort of duty towards fact checking and lie detection that you do towards locking your front door when you go on holiday.
In outlets regarded as responsible (there are lots) the principle distortion is done by story selection. Take the BBC, which I greatly admire. They would, I think, never run a series, fully researched, to try to demonstrate all the ways in which people manipulate and abuse the benefits and welfare system. Or do detailed case studies on how particular families spend years and generations doing little at our expense. (The sort of project the odious Matt Goodwin would be fond of). But they are never short of super people who are going to suffer egregiously from any change in the system.
The BBC are to an extent even more pernicious. Providing false equivalence is unforgivable. Giving equal billing to the Chairman of the World Bank and Andrea Leadsom to determine the economic effects of Brexit was outrageous. The BBC were also great exponents of the Minford Paradigm. Once again providing a disreputable but largely hidden false equivalence. Theyveould take their pick of any one of 1,000 economists who would maintain Brexit was an economic disaster against Patrick Minford, who was the only one who thought Brexit would be great.
That's just you complaining that they give a platform to a view you do not like.
If an opinion is colourable, then giving equal treatment is entirely fair. Arguments for and against Brexit are colourable.
What the BBC would not do is give a platform to someone disputing that the Holocaust took place, as such an opinion is not colourable.
How the myth that Labour have done nothing in 2 years became fixed in the minds of voters .
A relentless anti Labour campaign by the media and poor No 10 communications culminated in where we are today.
It isn't the task of the media to be a PR company for any government. This government has been terrible at communications, and especially the art of communicating convincingly by answering questions and not being evasive.
also terrible decision making. Sacking Robbins and then clinging on....
I think that is largely correct.
But neither is it the job of Allister Heath and Allison Pearson to represent fiction as fact. The job of the Telegraph ( and GB News and Talk TV) is to report the news objectively not to use smoke and mirrors to roll the pitch for the next Government in 3,4,5 years time. One could argue a competent Government should have the wherewithal to call out and correct inaccuracies, but it seems this one didn't.
Starmer is wholly to blame for this.
Largely agree, but there is no such thing as objective news coverage. They could all try harder to separate fact and opinion. So we have to rely on an open free media.
There are loads of outlets who would reasonably fairly but critically report on Labour doing well. Mirror, Guardian, FT, New Statesman, Economist, Ch4, ITV, BBC, Times to some extent, vast numbers on X and other social media. An infinity of podcasts.
As to the Right Wing media, in general they gave the Tories a hard time in government IIRC. I find it hard to follow because it's unreadable.
Whereas I accept there will be a bias when reporting news, any news, it is the out and out lies I was objecting to.
It's like giving a false equivalent to reporting by Rachel Maddows and. Jesse Watters. Maddows takes a story, reports the story and opines from the left. Jesse Watters ignores any story but just makes stuff up with no basis upon fact, to promote his cause, which is invariably Trump.
Largely agree. I think in this particular age the prevalence of lies is going to be a reality and unavoidable. I imagine most people just avoid wasting much time on lying outlets. I think everyone knows that in a social media age you have the same sort of duty towards fact checking and lie detection that you do towards locking your front door when you go on holiday.
In outlets regarded as responsible (there are lots) the principle distortion is done by story selection. Take the BBC, which I greatly admire. They would, I think, never run a series, fully researched, to try to demonstrate all the ways in which people manipulate and abuse the benefits and welfare system. Or do detailed case studies on how particular families spend years and generations doing little at our expense. (The sort of project the odious Matt Goodwin would be fond of). But they are never short of super people who are going to suffer egregiously from any change in the system.
The BBC are to an extent even more pernicious. Providing false equivalence is unforgivable. Giving equal billing to the Chairman of the World Bank and Andrea Leadsom to determine the economic effects of Brexit was outrageous. The BBC were also great exponents of the Minford Paradigm. Once again providing a disreputable but largely hidden false equivalence. Theyveould take their pick of any one of 1,000 economists who would maintain Brexit was an economic disaster against Patrick Minford, who was the only one who thought Brexit would be great.
Yet it hasn't been an economic disaster, nor anything resembling one, as has been demonstrated amply by some very good recent thread headers that I must have missed your rebbutal of. So Leadsom was more accurate than the Head of the World Bank, which rather seems to vindicate her being platformed.
With so many open and interesting questions to get stuck into it seems crazy to focus energy on ones that are settled, such as has Brexit thus far been good or bad for the economy.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Rainbow Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
I don't really mind elected councils flying flags of countries that they promised to support, or British flags if they said they'd do that, or indeed refusing to fly flags. That's democracy. But I object to anyone putting up any flags they fancy on public flagpoles, just because the council can't be bothered to prosecture them for littering. It's well-established locally that Oxfordshire flags are being put up by far-right provocateurs. Why aren't they being prosecuted?
We don’t really do flags stuck up in peoples gardens or hanging from their houses unless it’s during big sporting events .
That has changed in recent years, British, English, Palestinian and Schmalzy Poppy flags are all visible on peoples houses and gardens within a couple of miles of me.
The lamp post zip-tie ones from last summer are pretty filthy and frayed now. I see this as allegorical of the decline of the country.
National flags should only be flown during sporting events like the World Cup and Six Nations. They should only be flown until the clock strikes midnight until the next day they are required.
Flying flags for Ukraine against a common enemy, or France for "Je suis Charlie" or Palestine or Israel might be more problematic.
Flying a flag as a threat should not be allowed.
It's not really 'major sporting events', though, is it? It's just football.
I was in Glasgow last October. In NW Glasgow, 50/50 Scotland/Palestine flags were being flown from lampposts; in N Glasgow it was all Saltires. My string suspicion was that the main aim of each group of flag flyers was to annoy the other lot, and that the views of actual Palestinians or any other group were almost incidental.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Rainbow Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
I don't really mind elected councils flying flags of countries that they promised to support, or British flags if they said they'd do that, or indeed refusing to fly flags. That's democracy. But I object to anyone putting up any flags they fancy on public flagpoles, just because the council can't be bothered to prosecture them for littering. It's well-established locally that Oxfordshire flags are being put up by far-right provocateurs. Why aren't they being prosecuted?
Because unless you catch them in the act you can't identify who did it..
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Rainbow Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
I don't really mind elected councils flying flags of countries that they promised to support, or British flags if they said they'd do that, or indeed refusing to fly flags. That's democracy. But I object to anyone putting up any flags they fancy on public flagpoles, just because the council can't be bothered to prosecture them for littering. It's well-established locally that Oxfordshire flags are being put up by far-right provocateurs. Why aren't they being prosecuted?
Because unless you catch them in the act you can't identify who did it..
Unless something changes fairly radically by November there is going to be a blue wave for the Democrats there. And most of the changes that seem to coming (or not coming in respect of the Straits of Hormuz) look very bad for Trump and the GOP. My guess at the moment is that the Dems will have a lead of something like 30 in the House although I still think that the Senate is a struggle.
Afternoon from Troyes, home of the Knights Templar who still seem to have a modern following. It’s also the place where a strong woman in the background, Joan of Arc, backed a different successor from the one she was expected to.
Should we be paying attention to other strong woman in the background when it comes to the next coronation?
Afternoon from Troyes, home of the Knights Templar who still seem to have a modern following. It’s also the place where a strong woman in the background, Joan of Arc, backed a different successor from the one she was expected to.
Should we be paying attention to other strong woman in the background when it comes to the next coronation?
Unless something changes fairly radically by November there is going to be a blue wave for the Democrats there. And most of the changes that seem to coming (or not coming in respect of the Straits of Hormuz) look very bad for Trump and the GOP. My guess at the moment is that the Dems will have a lead of something like 30 in the House although I still think that the Senate is a struggle.
Massive gerrymandering is underway all across the South since the gutting of the Voters Rights Act. Jim Crow lives on, and some scenes look like photos from 60 years ago. So it will be tight.
Meanwhile Trump is planning to use taxpayers money to fund a $1.7 billion fund to distribute amongst the Jan 6 rioters and other election deniers.
It isn't going to be free and fair elections, at least in many States.
All three statements are undoubtedly true. But is there a (recent) context for statement one?
So the Reform council in Essex has taken down the flag of Ukraine from the council HQ.
James Cleverly criticised it.
Here's one of Farage's top aides defending it
If you were wondering why the Conservative Party just suffered its worst defeat in Essex - and why it will cease to exist there after the next general election - look no further.
The Tories spent 14 years treating the national interest as one priority among many.
Nadhim Zahawi retweeted it and other comments defending the decisions and wrote this
No one disagrees that we should remain steadfast in our support of the brave Ukrainians. I still believe that public services should be focused on delivery for the British people & our flag is a proud reminder of who we prioritise.
His former colleagues are calling out his pro-Putinism
Reform being so openly hostile to Britain’s support for Ukraine is one of the most off-putting things about them.
Flying the flag of a free and sovereign Ukraine is a mark of our upholding their right to exist as a nation in the face of the murder, rape and pillage of Putin’s unprovoked invasion.
Doing so does not detract from or diminish Britain’s national interest. It enhances it. We have a clear national interest in the defence of Europe, and not emboldening further Russian aggression.
I am also astonished to see @nadhimzahawi retweeting what Mr Orr posted. He, like me, served in the Cabinet of @BorisJohnson.
He, like me, knows how critical Britain’s military and moral support has been to preventing a Russian conquest. He used to believe in these things.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
Bollocks.
The outrage is the Reform traitors saying that helping Ukraine isn't in the UK's national interest and the top priority for the UK in so many ways.
Yeah.
Reform could have stuck to "it's national policy", even if it's a bit weird to have a national policy on that when there are a billion things they don't have a policy on.
Orr's sin is saying the quiet bit out loud- that Reform is all about spending money on mememe, not on them. And a chunky slice of the electorate has always been cool with that. See the patriotic Conservatives who thought that fighting Hitler was an unfortunate mistake.
There's plenty of Tories on here, we might have voted differently on Brexit, we might be on the left of the party, some of us are on the right of the party, we disagree on plenty, but one thing we all agree on supporting Ukraine is absolutely the right thing to do, and absolutely in the UK's top interest.
'In the UK's top interest' does not really make sense. People need to be clear and say what they mean. Is it the UK's number one foreign policy objective? I would say not, but it's an arguable view. Is it the UK's number one objective full stop? I would say certainly not. Either way, I don't think taking a flag down from a municipal building can be seen as an act of teachery, nor worthy of invoking Hitler as I see a particularly silly post has done.
Also, whether or not the colours of Charles XII of Sweden flies outside County Hall in fucking Chelmsford makes zero difference to whatever the fuck is going on in the 'Bass.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Rainbow Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
I don't really mind elected councils flying flags of countries that they promised to support, or British flags if they said they'd do that, or indeed refusing to fly flags. That's democracy. But I object to anyone putting up any flags they fancy on public flagpoles, just because the council can't be bothered to prosecture them for littering. It's well-established locally that Oxfordshire flags are being put up by far-right provocateurs. Why aren't they being prosecuted?
Because unless you catch them in the act you can't identify who did it..
It seems that you just have to start taking them down and they'll turn up to dissuade you. Rozzers could take them then, probably pick up a fair few more serious offences in the process.
Unless something changes fairly radically by November there is going to be a blue wave for the Democrats there. And most of the changes that seem to coming (or not coming in respect of the Straits of Hormuz) look very bad for Trump and the GOP. My guess at the moment is that the Dems will have a lead of something like 30 in the House although I still think that the Senate is a struggle.
Massive gerrymandering is underway all across the South since the gutting of the Voters Rights Act. Jim Crow lives on, and some scenes look like photos from 60 years ago. So it will be tight.
Meanwhile Trump is planning to use taxpayers money to fund a $1.7 billion fund to distribute amongst the Jan 6 rioters and other election deniers.
It isn't going to be free and fair elections, at least in many States.
The gerrymandering in the Blue states will at least match that in the red. Of course democracy is the loser in both. At what point do we have to accept that the USA is not an operating democracy at all?
How the myth that Labour have done nothing in 2 years became fixed in the minds of voters .
A relentless anti Labour campaign by the media and poor No 10 communications culminated in where we are today.
It isn't the task of the media to be a PR company for any government. This government has been terrible at communications, and especially the art of communicating convincingly by answering questions and not being evasive.
also terrible decision making. Sacking Robbins and then clinging on....
I think that is largely correct.
But neither is it the job of Allister Heath and Allison Pearson to represent fiction as fact. The job of the Telegraph ( and GB News and Talk TV) is to report the news objectively not to use smoke and mirrors to roll the pitch for the next Government in 3,4,5 years time. One could argue a competent Government should have the wherewithal to call out and correct inaccuracies, but it seems this one didn't.
Starmer is wholly to blame for this.
Largely agree, but there is no such thing as objective news coverage. They could all try harder to separate fact and opinion. So we have to rely on an open free media.
There are loads of outlets who would reasonably fairly but critically report on Labour doing well. Mirror, Guardian, FT, New Statesman, Economist, Ch4, ITV, BBC, Times to some extent, vast numbers on X and other social media. An infinity of podcasts.
As to the Right Wing media, in general they gave the Tories a hard time in government IIRC. I find it hard to follow because it's unreadable.
Whereas I accept there will be a bias when reporting news, any news, it is the out and out lies I was objecting to.
It's like giving a false equivalent to reporting by Rachel Maddows and. Jesse Watters. Maddows takes a story, reports the story and opines from the left. Jesse Watters ignores any story but just makes stuff up with no basis upon fact, to promote his cause, which is invariably Trump.
Largely agree. I think in this particular age the prevalence of lies is going to be a reality and unavoidable. I imagine most people just avoid wasting much time on lying outlets. I think everyone knows that in a social media age you have the same sort of duty towards fact checking and lie detection that you do towards locking your front door when you go on holiday.
In outlets regarded as responsible (there are lots) the principle distortion is done by story selection. Take the BBC, which I greatly admire. They would, I think, never run a series, fully researched, to try to demonstrate all the ways in which people manipulate and abuse the benefits and welfare system. Or do detailed case studies on how particular families spend years and generations doing little at our expense. (The sort of project the odious Matt Goodwin would be fond of). But they are never short of super people who are going to suffer egregiously from any change in the system.
The BBC are to an extent even more pernicious. Providing false equivalence is unforgivable. Giving equal billing to the Chairman of the World Bank and Andrea Leadsom to determine the economic effects of Brexit was outrageous. The BBC were also great exponents of the Minford Paradigm. Once again providing a disreputable but largely hidden false equivalence. Theyveould take their pick of any one of 1,000 economists who would maintain Brexit was an economic disaster against Patrick Minford, who was the only one who thought Brexit would be great.
That's just you complaining that they give a platform to a view you do not like.
If an opinion is colourable, then giving equal treatment is entirely fair. Arguments for and against Brexit are colourable.
What the BBC would not do is give a platform to someone disputing that the Holocaust took place, as such an opinion is not colourable.
That is not true.
What I am arguing against is this absurd notion of "balance" by the BBC which develops into Andrea Leadsom being given expertise parity with WTO Chair, Pascal Lamy.
I don't believe even the BBC go to the extent of giving flat eartherers equality to demonstrate the Earth is not round.
But they do use people like Mark Regev and Elon Levy as impartial commentators to the war in Gaza as a foil, just in case viewers take exception to the unbiased, (not-hostile- to-Palestine) Jeremy Bowen.
The last two Labour leaders have been London based. I like London, it’s awesome.
But I wonder if a leader not from London will make a positive impact just by the virtue of killing the idea that Labour is a southern party that doesn’t understand the north.
Prime ministers represent the country not a particular region. It doesn't matter where they're from, any more than it matters where they went to school.
What matters is that they have good judgement and good policies which they can implement
A noble sentiment. The reality is decades of increasingly London centric government.
WATCH: This is the moment we asked Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Chief Operating Officer if his personal social media account was appropriate whilst the company is accused of 'unacceptable' levels of sewage.
All three statements are undoubtedly true. But is there a (recent) context for statement one?
Meanwhile, in other "meet the new boss" news,
Former Conservative party deputy chair Jonathan Gullis has been selected as Reform UK's group leader at a local authority in Staffordshire.
Gullis, who defected to Reform at the end of last year, was chosen by local party members in Newcastle-under-Lyme at a meeting on Thursday.
It means the ex-MP is likely to become the next leader of Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council, following a vote during a full council meeting next Wednesday.
It's not just that Reform have become a home for Conservative right-wingers, it's very largely all the most awful Conservative right-wingers.
All is well that ends well. After being turfed out of Parliament Jonathan Gullis was unable to secure a teaching post because his mad rhetoric as a lunatic MP kept following him around. So isn't this a nice story with a happy ending?
Between 2019 and 2025 I was in some WhatsApp groups with Jonathan Gullis.
The man is thicker than whale omelette.
Maybe but he now leads a council with an annual budget of £20 million and a capital budget of over £100 million. Indeed as Reform leader of Newcastle under Lyme council, Gullis arguably has more power than he ever did as a backbench Tory MP (albeit with a brief stint as Liz Truss' Parliamentary Under Secretary for School Standards)
I’m not sure being a PUSS justifies the implication of that “albeit”!
Unless something changes fairly radically by November there is going to be a blue wave for the Democrats there. And most of the changes that seem to coming (or not coming in respect of the Straits of Hormuz) look very bad for Trump and the GOP. My guess at the moment is that the Dems will have a lead of something like 30 in the House although I still think that the Senate is a struggle.
Massive gerrymandering is underway all across the South since the gutting of the Voters Rights Act. Jim Crow lives on, and some scenes look like photos from 60 years ago. So it will be tight.
Meanwhile Trump is planning to use taxpayers money to fund a $1.7 billion fund to distribute amongst the Jan 6 rioters and other election deniers.
It isn't going to be free and fair elections, at least in many States.
Can you give a number for this 'massive gerrymandering' ?
A district in Louisiana, a district in Tennessee, a district Mississippi, a district in Alabama perhaps.
What's potentially more damaging for the Dems is that the extra four districts they're trying to gerrymander for themselves in Virginia has been put on hold by the courts.
But its all a +/- at the edges.
If the Dems are 5% ahead nationally they will get a comfortable majority in the House, if they are 10% ahead (which they should be) then they will get a landslide majority.
WATCH: This is the moment we asked Dwr Cymru Welsh Water's Chief Operating Officer if his personal social media account was appropriate whilst the company is accused of 'unacceptable' levels of sewage.
We don’t really do flags stuck up in peoples gardens or hanging from their houses unless it’s during big sporting events .
That has changed in recent years, British, English, Palestinian and Schmalzy Poppy flags are all visible on peoples houses and gardens within a couple of miles of me.
The lamp post zip-tie ones from last summer are pretty filthy and frayed now. I see this as allegorical of the decline of the country.
National flags should only be flown during sporting events like the World Cup and Six Nations. They should only be flown until the clock strikes midnight until the next day they are required.
Flying flags for Ukraine against a common enemy, or France for "Je suis Charlie" or Palestine or Israel might be more problematic.
Flying a flag as a threat should not be allowed.
It's not really 'major sporting events', though, is it? It's just football.
I was in Glasgow last October. In NW Glasgow, 50/50 Scotland/Palestine flags were being flown from lampposts; in N Glasgow it was all Saltires. My string suspicion was that the main aim of each group of flag flyers was to annoy the other lot, and that the views of actual Palestinians or any other group were almost incidental.
Flying the flag of Wales on the days they get smashed by Georgia in the Autumn Internationals outside one's own house is perfectly acceptable to show sporting solidarity. Flying Welsh flags from lampposts at Monmouth as a threat for the English to keep out is not.
Unless something changes fairly radically by November there is going to be a blue wave for the Democrats there. And most of the changes that seem to coming (or not coming in respect of the Straits of Hormuz) look very bad for Trump and the GOP. My guess at the moment is that the Dems will have a lead of something like 30 in the House although I still think that the Senate is a struggle.
Massive gerrymandering is underway all across the South since the gutting of the Voters Rights Act. Jim Crow lives on, and some scenes look like photos from 60 years ago. So it will be tight.
Meanwhile Trump is planning to use taxpayers money to fund a $1.7 billion fund to distribute amongst the Jan 6 rioters and other election deniers.
It isn't going to be free and fair elections, at least in many States.
Can you give a number for this 'massive gerrymandering' ?
A district in Louisiana, a district in Tennessee, a district Mississippi, a district in Alabama perhaps.
What's potentially more damaging for the Dems is that the extra four districts they're trying to gerrymander for themselves in Virginia has been put on hold by the courts.
But its all a +/- at the edges.
If the Dems are 5% ahead nationally they will get a comfortable majority in the House, if they are 10% ahead (which they should be) then they will get a landslide majority.
19 members of the House Black Caucus are under threat.
Thoughts and prayers for the good folk of Makerfield. The by-election circus is in town.
With a high proportion of clowns, but little humour,
The comedy happens when the Returning Officer announces "Matthew Goodwin is hereby declared the MP for Makerfield". Tell me you wouldn't laugh so hard your **** would fall off.
@HormuzLetter BREAKING: Trump to decide within the next 24 hours on major military action against Iran, with Israel receiving the final answer in the same window, per Channel 12. A senior Israeli official said the resumption of the war is "near" and Israel is preparing for "several days to several weeks" of fighting.
So cue announcement that he has pulled back from military action thanks to a new note from the Iranians passed by Pakistan which is worth considering, just in time for the markets to open on Monday.
How the myth that Labour have done nothing in 2 years became fixed in the minds of voters .
A relentless anti Labour campaign by the media and poor No 10 communications culminated in where we are today.
It isn't the task of the media to be a PR company for any government. This government has been terrible at communications, and especially the art of communicating convincingly by answering questions and not being evasive.
also terrible decision making. Sacking Robbins and then clinging on....
I think that is largely correct.
But neither is it the job of Allister Heath and Allison Pearson to represent fiction as fact. The job of the Telegraph ( and GB News and Talk TV) is to report the news objectively not to use smoke and mirrors to roll the pitch for the next Government in 3,4,5 years time. One could argue a competent Government should have the wherewithal to call out and correct inaccuracies, but it seems this one didn't.
Starmer is wholly to blame for this.
Largely agree, but there is no such thing as objective news coverage. They could all try harder to separate fact and opinion. So we have to rely on an open free media.
There are loads of outlets who would reasonably fairly but critically report on Labour doing well. Mirror, Guardian, FT, New Statesman, Economist, Ch4, ITV, BBC, Times to some extent, vast numbers on X and other social media. An infinity of podcasts.
As to the Right Wing media, in general they gave the Tories a hard time in government IIRC. I find it hard to follow because it's unreadable.
Whereas I accept there will be a bias when reporting news, any news, it is the out and out lies I was objecting to.
It's like giving a false equivalent to reporting by Rachel Maddows and. Jesse Watters. Maddows takes a story, reports the story and opines from the left. Jesse Watters ignores any story but just makes stuff up with no basis upon fact, to promote his cause, which is invariably Trump.
Largely agree. I think in this particular age the prevalence of lies is going to be a reality and unavoidable. I imagine most people just avoid wasting much time on lying outlets. I think everyone knows that in a social media age you have the same sort of duty towards fact checking and lie detection that you do towards locking your front door when you go on holiday.
In outlets regarded as responsible (there are lots) the principle distortion is done by story selection. Take the BBC, which I greatly admire. They would, I think, never run a series, fully researched, to try to demonstrate all the ways in which people manipulate and abuse the benefits and welfare system. Or do detailed case studies on how particular families spend years and generations doing little at our expense. (The sort of project the odious Matt Goodwin would be fond of). But they are never short of super people who are going to suffer egregiously from any change in the system.
The BBC are to an extent even more pernicious. Providing false equivalence is unforgivable. Giving equal billing to the Chairman of the World Bank and Andrea Leadsom to determine the economic effects of Brexit was outrageous. The BBC were also great exponents of the Minford Paradigm. Once again providing a disreputable but largely hidden false equivalence. Theyveould take their pick of any one of 1,000 economists who would maintain Brexit was an economic disaster against Patrick Minford, who was the only one who thought Brexit would be great.
That's just you complaining that they give a platform to a view you do not like.
If an opinion is colourable, then giving equal treatment is entirely fair. Arguments for and against Brexit are colourable.
What the BBC would not do is give a platform to someone disputing that the Holocaust took place, as such an opinion is not colourable.
That is not true.
What I am arguing against is this absurd notion of "balance" by the BBC which develops into Andrea Leadsom being given expertise parity with WTO Chair, Pascal Lamy.
I don't believe even the BBC go to the extent of giving flat eartherers equality to demonstrate the Earth is not round.
But they do use people like Mark Regev and Elon Levy as impartial commentators to the war in Gaza as a foil, just in case viewers take exception to the unbiased, (not-hostile- to-Palestine) Jeremy Bowen.
Your inability to see your own prejudices, only those on the other side, is amusing, to say the least. It's part of the hypocrisy I associate from my impeccably neutral background with the left in general. 😂
How the myth that Labour have done nothing in 2 years became fixed in the minds of voters .
A relentless anti Labour campaign by the media and poor No 10 communications culminated in where we are today.
It isn't the task of the media to be a PR company for any government. This government has been terrible at communications, and especially the art of communicating convincingly by answering questions and not being evasive.
also terrible decision making. Sacking Robbins and then clinging on....
I think that is largely correct.
But neither is it the job of Allister Heath and Allison Pearson to represent fiction as fact. The job of the Telegraph ( and GB News and Talk TV) is to report the news objectively not to use smoke and mirrors to roll the pitch for the next Government in 3,4,5 years time. One could argue a competent Government should have the wherewithal to call out and correct inaccuracies, but it seems this one didn't.
Starmer is wholly to blame for this.
Largely agree, but there is no such thing as objective news coverage. They could all try harder to separate fact and opinion. So we have to rely on an open free media.
There are loads of outlets who would reasonably fairly but critically report on Labour doing well. Mirror, Guardian, FT, New Statesman, Economist, Ch4, ITV, BBC, Times to some extent, vast numbers on X and other social media. An infinity of podcasts.
As to the Right Wing media, in general they gave the Tories a hard time in government IIRC. I find it hard to follow because it's unreadable.
Whereas I accept there will be a bias when reporting news, any news, it is the out and out lies I was objecting to.
It's like giving a false equivalent to reporting by Rachel Maddows and. Jesse Watters. Maddows takes a story, reports the story and opines from the left. Jesse Watters ignores any story but just makes stuff up with no basis upon fact, to promote his cause, which is invariably Trump.
Largely agree. I think in this particular age the prevalence of lies is going to be a reality and unavoidable. I imagine most people just avoid wasting much time on lying outlets. I think everyone knows that in a social media age you have the same sort of duty towards fact checking and lie detection that you do towards locking your front door when you go on holiday.
In outlets regarded as responsible (there are lots) the principle distortion is done by story selection. Take the BBC, which I greatly admire. They would, I think, never run a series, fully researched, to try to demonstrate all the ways in which people manipulate and abuse the benefits and welfare system. Or do detailed case studies on how particular families spend years and generations doing little at our expense. (The sort of project the odious Matt Goodwin would be fond of). But they are never short of super people who are going to suffer egregiously from any change in the system.
The BBC are to an extent even more pernicious. Providing false equivalence is unforgivable. Giving equal billing to the Chairman of the World Bank and Andrea Leadsom to determine the economic effects of Brexit was outrageous. The BBC were also great exponents of the Minford Paradigm. Once again providing a disreputable but largely hidden false equivalence. Theyveould take their pick of any one of 1,000 economists who would maintain Brexit was an economic disaster against Patrick Minford, who was the only one who thought Brexit would be great.
That's just you complaining that they give a platform to a view you do not like.
If an opinion is colourable, then giving equal treatment is entirely fair. Arguments for and against Brexit are colourable.
What the BBC would not do is give a platform to someone disputing that the Holocaust took place, as such an opinion is not colourable.
That is not true.
What I am arguing against is this absurd notion of "balance" by the BBC which develops into Andrea Leadsom being given expertise parity with WTO Chair, Pascal Lamy.
I don't believe even the BBC go to the extent of giving flat eartherers equality to demonstrate the Earth is not round.
But they do use people like Mark Regev and Elon Levy as impartial commentators to the war in Gaza as a foil, just in case viewers take exception to the unbiased, (not-hostile- to-Palestine) Jeremy Bowen.
Your inability to see your own prejudices, only those on the other side, is amusing, to say the least. It's part of the hypocrisy I associate from my impeccably neutral background with the left in general. 😂
The false equivalence happens on the other side too. But why should I promote your political grievances rather than my own?
Thoughts and prayers for the good folk of Makerfield. The by-election circus is in town.
With a high proportion of clowns, but little humour,
The comedy happens when the Returning Officer announces "Matthew Goodwin is hereby declared the MP for Makerfield". Tell me you wouldn't laugh so hard your **** would fall off.
I don't like Burnham and I've no reason to think he'd be anything other than a fiasco as PM.
But given a choice between Burnham as PM and Matthew Goodwin as an MP, I'll take Burnham.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Rainbow Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
I don't really mind elected councils flying flags of countries that they promised to support, or British flags if they said they'd do that, or indeed refusing to fly flags. That's democracy. But I object to anyone putting up any flags they fancy on public flagpoles, just because the council can't be bothered to prosecture them for littering. It's well-established locally that Oxfordshire flags are being put up by far-right provocateurs. Why aren't they being prosecuted?
Because unless you catch them in the act you can't identify who did it..
I came across a flag flyer a few months back. It was a lunar eclipse, or something. Round here is very flat: the highest point you can get for looking at astronomical phenomena on the horizon is the pedestrian bridge over the M60. The family and I traipsed up there to see what we could see. A balding middle aged man in vaguely military attire saw us and sat awkwardly in his bag, lookung away from us and making no convversation or eye contact. I spotted the flaggery in his bag that he was trying to conceal with his bum. After ten cheerful but unsuccessful minutes of astronomy incongruously accompanied by a tense man, we left, no doubt to his great relief, only to pass a happy Pakistani family with the same idea. I expect he had a succession of these experiences all evening.
Thoughts and prayers for the good folk of Makerfield. The by-election circus is in town.
With a high proportion of clowns, but little humour,
The comedy happens when the Returning Officer announces "Matthew Goodwin is hereby declared the MP for Makerfield". Tell me you wouldn't laugh so hard your **** would fall off.
I don't like Burnham and I've no reason to think he'd be anything other than a fiasco as PM.
But given a choice between Burnham as PM and Matthew Goodwin as an MP, I'll take Burnham.
All three statements are undoubtedly true. But is there a (recent) context for statement one?
So the Reform council in Essex has taken down the flag of Ukraine from the council HQ.
James Cleverly criticised it.
Here's one of Farage's top aides defending it
If you were wondering why the Conservative Party just suffered its worst defeat in Essex - and why it will cease to exist there after the next general election - look no further.
The Tories spent 14 years treating the national interest as one priority among many.
Nadhim Zahawi retweeted it and other comments defending the decisions and wrote this
No one disagrees that we should remain steadfast in our support of the brave Ukrainians. I still believe that public services should be focused on delivery for the British people & our flag is a proud reminder of who we prioritise.
His former colleagues are calling out his pro-Putinism
Reform being so openly hostile to Britain’s support for Ukraine is one of the most off-putting things about them.
Flying the flag of a free and sovereign Ukraine is a mark of our upholding their right to exist as a nation in the face of the murder, rape and pillage of Putin’s unprovoked invasion.
Doing so does not detract from or diminish Britain’s national interest. It enhances it. We have a clear national interest in the defence of Europe, and not emboldening further Russian aggression.
I am also astonished to see @nadhimzahawi retweeting what Mr Orr posted. He, like me, served in the Cabinet of @BorisJohnson.
He, like me, knows how critical Britain’s military and moral support has been to preventing a Russian conquest. He used to believe in these things.
All three statements are undoubtedly true. But is there a (recent) context for statement one?
So the Reform council in Essex has taken down the flag of Ukraine from the council HQ.
James Cleverly criticised it.
Here's one of Farage's top aides defending it
If you were wondering why the Conservative Party just suffered its worst defeat in Essex - and why it will cease to exist there after the next general election - look no further.
The Tories spent 14 years treating the national interest as one priority among many.
Nadhim Zahawi retweeted it and other comments defending the decisions and wrote this
No one disagrees that we should remain steadfast in our support of the brave Ukrainians. I still believe that public services should be focused on delivery for the British people & our flag is a proud reminder of who we prioritise.
His former colleagues are calling out his pro-Putinism
Reform being so openly hostile to Britain’s support for Ukraine is one of the most off-putting things about them.
Flying the flag of a free and sovereign Ukraine is a mark of our upholding their right to exist as a nation in the face of the murder, rape and pillage of Putin’s unprovoked invasion.
Doing so does not detract from or diminish Britain’s national interest. It enhances it. We have a clear national interest in the defence of Europe, and not emboldening further Russian aggression.
I am also astonished to see @nadhimzahawi retweeting what Mr Orr posted. He, like me, served in the Cabinet of @BorisJohnson.
He, like me, knows how critical Britain’s military and moral support has been to preventing a Russian conquest. He used to believe in these things.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
Bollocks.
The outrage is the Reform traitors saying that helping Ukraine isn't in the UK's national interest and the top priority for the UK in so many ways.
I am looking forward to the end of the era of performative emoting via flag. It will at the very least save on flags.
I'm sorry to say, but that's a pretty snivelling response.
Ukraine is in an existential fight against a brutal dictator. And the first thing Reform does is take down the flag of Ukraine? That really is performative, isn't it?
And this from a party led by someone who repeated Kremlin talking points when comfortably ensconced in the European Parliament.
Nauseating, and a timely reminder to Tories about why they should have no truck with these populists.
The replacement of performative flag flying with national flag flying does not stop when there's a performative flag for a cause one really really really likes. There are plenty of people who feel every bit as strongly about pride flags. I am glad they are going. These councils serve British communities - they are not there to preach about what the people in those communities should care about or prioritise.
But Reform and its ilk flying Union flags and flags of St George on lampposts are both performative and often threatening. The flags are flown as a "f*** off" to non English/ British. I know this because in 1970s Herefordshire the flag of St George was displayed to ward off the neighbouring Welsh. Likewise Loyalists painting flagstones in Antrim and Republicans painting flagstones in Derry.
At his home, Peter Robinson has a massive flagpole with a flag of St George fluttering in the wind, you can see it above the secure fences of his gated gaff. I took it to performatively mean "f*** off Catholics".
When I was growing up flying a flag at all was very infra dig.
The only person I knew with a flagpole was the Lord Lieutenant and we mercilessly took the p1ss
Unless something changes fairly radically by November there is going to be a blue wave for the Democrats there. And most of the changes that seem to coming (or not coming in respect of the Straits of Hormuz) look very bad for Trump and the GOP. My guess at the moment is that the Dems will have a lead of something like 30 in the House although I still think that the Senate is a struggle.
Massive gerrymandering is underway all across the South since the gutting of the Voters Rights Act. Jim Crow lives on, and some scenes look like photos from 60 years ago. So it will be tight.
Meanwhile Trump is planning to use taxpayers money to fund a $1.7 billion fund to distribute amongst the Jan 6 rioters and other election deniers.
It isn't going to be free and fair elections, at least in many States.
The gerrymandering in the Blue states will at least match that in the red. Of course democracy is the loser in both. At what point do we have to accept that the USA is not an operating democracy at all?
If you imagine the end game of this process that each state sends Congress a delegation consisting of people from the party that won a majority in that state, I think that would clearly be a democratic system.
We don’t really do flags stuck up in peoples gardens or hanging from their houses unless it’s during big sporting events .
That has changed in recent years, British, English, Palestinian and Schmalzy Poppy flags are all visible on peoples houses and gardens within a couple of miles of me.
The lamp post zip-tie ones from last summer are pretty filthy and frayed now. I see this as allegorical of the decline of the country.
National flags should only be flown during sporting events like the World Cup and Six Nations. They should only be flown until the clock strikes midnight until the next day they are required.
Flying flags for Ukraine against a common enemy, or France for "Je suis Charlie" or Palestine or Israel might be more problematic.
Flying a flag as a threat should not be allowed.
It's not really 'major sporting events', though, is it? It's just football.
I was in Glasgow last October. In NW Glasgow, 50/50 Scotland/Palestine flags were being flown from lampposts; in N Glasgow it was all Saltires. My string suspicion was that the main aim of each group of flag flyers was to annoy the other lot, and that the views of actual Palestinians or any other group were almost incidental.
Flying the flag of Wales on the days they get smashed by Georgia in the Autumn Internationals outside one's own house is perfectly acceptable to show sporting solidarity. Flying Welsh flags from lampposts at Monmouth as a threat for the English to keep out is not.
I'd love to plough on with this because I suspect we coykd find some common ground. An afternoon of famiky responsibilities callls though! I'm sure thr subject will arise again. Have a nice afternoon everyone.
All three statements are undoubtedly true. But is there a (recent) context for statement one?
So the Reform council in Essex has taken down the flag of Ukraine from the council HQ.
James Cleverly criticised it.
Here's one of Farage's top aides defending it
If you were wondering why the Conservative Party just suffered its worst defeat in Essex - and why it will cease to exist there after the next general election - look no further.
The Tories spent 14 years treating the national interest as one priority among many.
Nadhim Zahawi retweeted it and other comments defending the decisions and wrote this
No one disagrees that we should remain steadfast in our support of the brave Ukrainians. I still believe that public services should be focused on delivery for the British people & our flag is a proud reminder of who we prioritise.
His former colleagues are calling out his pro-Putinism
Reform being so openly hostile to Britain’s support for Ukraine is one of the most off-putting things about them.
Flying the flag of a free and sovereign Ukraine is a mark of our upholding their right to exist as a nation in the face of the murder, rape and pillage of Putin’s unprovoked invasion.
Doing so does not detract from or diminish Britain’s national interest. It enhances it. We have a clear national interest in the defence of Europe, and not emboldening further Russian aggression.
I am also astonished to see @nadhimzahawi retweeting what Mr Orr posted. He, like me, served in the Cabinet of @BorisJohnson.
He, like me, knows how critical Britain’s military and moral support has been to preventing a Russian conquest. He used to believe in these things.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
Bollocks.
The outrage is the Reform traitors saying that helping Ukraine isn't in the UK's national interest and the top priority for the UK in so many ways.
I am looking forward to the end of the era of performative emoting via flag. It will at the very least save on flags.
I'm sorry to say, but that's a pretty snivelling response.
Ukraine is in an existential fight against a brutal dictator. And the first thing Reform does is take down the flag of Ukraine? That really is performative, isn't it?
And this from a party led by someone who repeated Kremlin talking points when comfortably ensconced in the European Parliament.
Nauseating, and a timely reminder to Tories about why they should have no truck with these populists.
The replacement of performative flag flying with national flag flying does not stop when there's a performative flag for a cause one really really really likes. There are plenty of people who feel every bit as strongly about pride flags. I am glad they are going. These councils serve British communities - they are not there to preach about what the people in those communities should care about or prioritise.
But Reform and its ilk flying Union flags and flags of St George on lampposts are both performative and often threatening. The flags are flown as a "f*** off" to non English/ British. I know this because in 1970s Herefordshire the flag of St George was displayed to ward off the neighbouring Welsh. Likewise Loyalists painting flagstones in Antrim and Republicans painting flagstones in Derry.
At his home, Peter Robinson has a massive flagpole with a flag of St George fluttering in the wind, you can see it above the secure fences of his gated gaff. I took it to performatively mean "f*** off Catholics".
When I was growing up flying a flag at all was very infra dig.
The only person I knew with a flagpole was the Lord Lieutenant and we mercilessly took the p1ss
My only connection with the flag was folding it for the Scouts. Oh and making sure when the flag was flown for the Scouts it wasn't displayed upside down. But then, Baden-Powell liked a flag. He was of course a great colonial patriot as well as a repressed homosexual. Of course there may be no correlation whatsoever.
This site has a problem, and this thread reveals it. It is endlessly anti Reform. Insulting them, laughing at them, scorning them, belittling them. It begins at the beginning of the thread and carries on through the thread
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
This site has a problem, and this thread reveals it. It is endlessly anti Reform. Insulting them, laughing at them, scorning them, belittling them. It begins at the beginning of the thread and carries on through the thread
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
For goodness sake, it is a thread about Trump! Who has mentioned Reform (except me)?
This site has a problem, and this thread reveals it. It is endlessly anti Reform. Insulting them, laughing at them, scorning them, belittling them. It begins at the beginning of the thread and carries on through the thread
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
I don't think anybody is referring to them in a way that suggests they are 'tiny.' As for popular, Putin is popular. Netanyahu is popular. Even Trump was fairly popular a couple of years ago. Hitler, Mussolini, Horthy, Stalin were all the most popular politicians in their country at the time. As was Chavez, or Castro.
Just because somebody is popular - and Reform are not actually *that* popular, their polling is comparable to the voteshare Major got in 1997 or Hague in 2001 - doesn't mean they're not dangerous.
Thoughts and prayers for the good folk of Makerfield. The by-election circus is in town.
With a high proportion of clowns, but little humour,
The comedy happens when the Returning Officer announces "Matthew Goodwin is hereby declared the MP for Makerfield". Tell me you wouldn't laugh so hard your **** would fall off.
I don't like Burnham and I've no reason to think he'd be anything other than a fiasco as PM.
But given a choice between Burnham as PM and Matthew Goodwin as an MP, I'll take Burnham.
I know, but just think of the ironic comedy gold.
I v much doubt Matt "I once turned off at Junction 26 of the M6 to go to Liverpool" Goodwin is going to be the candidate.
On my flegpole today. I think I am the only PB.com inmate with such a domestic amenity.
Honestly, after the utter shitshow of the Nancy Experiment, the bhois should never have been within sniffing distance of the SPL championship. Of course, that will be little comfort if they don't beat the jambos.
This site has a problem, and this thread reveals it. It is endlessly anti Reform. Insulting them, laughing at them, scorning them, belittling them. It begins at the beginning of the thread and carries on through the thread
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
Fuxake, stop snivelling. This site as been institutionally anti Nat (or Nit as you would describe it) for as long as I’ve been on it. I’m sure if all I want is to bathe in my own spit-warm world view there are other places for me to go.
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Rainbow Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
I don't really mind elected councils flying flags of countries that they promised to support, or British flags if they said they'd do that, or indeed refusing to fly flags. That's democracy. But I object to anyone putting up any flags they fancy on public flagpoles, just because the council can't be bothered to prosecture them for littering. It's well-established locally that Oxfordshire flags are being put up by far-right provocateurs. Why aren't they being prosecuted?
Because unless you catch them in the act you can't identify who did it..
It seems that you just have to start taking them down and they'll turn up to dissuade you. Rozzers could take them then, probably pick up a fair few more serious offences in the process.
What's the point? Taking flags down is just as performative as putting them up.
This site has a problem, and this thread reveals it. It is endlessly anti Reform. Insulting them, laughing at them, scorning them, belittling them. It begins at the beginning of the thread and carries on through the thread
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
Fuxake, stop snivelling. This site as been institutionally anti Nat (or Nit as you would describe it) for as long as I’ve been on it. I’m sure if all I want is to bathe in my own spit-warm world view there are other places for me to go.
Take it easy on him. Snowflakes can be very emotional on occasions.
This site has a problem, and this thread reveals it. It is endlessly anti Reform. Insulting them, laughing at them, scorning them, belittling them. It begins at the beginning of the thread and carries on through the thread
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
For goodness sake, it is a thread about Trump! Who has mentioned Reform (except me)?
Metropolitan Police @metpoliceuk · 1h Officers have made two arrests in the vicinity of Euston station.
Two men, wanted on suspicion of GBH following an incident in Birmingham where a man was run over, were spotted arriving into London to attend the UTK protest.
On my flegpole today. I think I am the only PB.com inmate with such a domestic amenity.
Honestly, after the utter shitshow of the Nancy Experiment, the bhois should never have been within sniffing distance of the SPL championship. Of course, that will be little comfort if they don't beat the jambos.
An Gorta Mór commemoration day tomorrow as reflected on Celtic’s jerseys. All the Rangers fans going mental at a match they’re not involved in will be going even more mental.
This site has a problem, and this thread reveals it. It is endlessly anti Reform. Insulting them, laughing at them, scorning them, belittling them. It begins at the beginning of the thread and carries on through the thread
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
Fuxake, stop snivelling. This site as been institutionally anti Nat (or Nit as you would describe it) for as long as I’ve been on it. I’m sure if all I want is to bathe in my own spit-warm world view there are other places for me to go.
lol!
I make a perfectly reasonable and measured point and get verbal abuse in return. Kinda proves my point
And FWIW I note that, amongst regular commenters, we have more Nits than Reformers
And yet the SNP at most take 3% of the polls, Reform on a good day take 30%
Reform's official policy is only the Union or county flags should fly from government or council buildings, they say they still support Ukraine but their policy is consistent. They will also ban flying of Rainbow Pride flags on government and council buildings, which many will also be appalled by
I don't really mind elected councils flying flags of countries that they promised to support, or British flags if they said they'd do that, or indeed refusing to fly flags. That's democracy. But I object to anyone putting up any flags they fancy on public flagpoles, just because the council can't be bothered to prosecture them for littering. It's well-established locally that Oxfordshire flags are being put up by far-right provocateurs. Why aren't they being prosecuted?
Because unless you catch them in the act you can't identify who did it..
It seems that you just have to start taking them down and they'll turn up to dissuade you. Rozzers could take them then, probably pick up a fair few more serious offences in the process.
What's the point? Taking flags down is just as performative as putting them up.
What about when they become so rag-arsed that council workmen have to take them down, that should encounter a surcharge for the original displayee.
Metropolitan Police @metpoliceuk · 1h Officers have made two arrests in the vicinity of Euston station.
Two men, wanted on suspicion of GBH following an incident in Birmingham where a man was run over, were spotted arriving into London to attend the UTK protest.
From the previous thread: That Guardian list does not include Huckleberry Finn, or any book by Asimov, Clark, or Heinlein.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a good friend, recently. We agreed that, if men want to understand women, they should read a few romance novels -- and if women want to understand men, they should read a few war histories.
As I recall, Disraeli made a similar point way back when.
(For the record: I haven't taken my own advice, but haven't given up on the idea.)
This site has a problem, and this thread reveals it. It is endlessly anti Reform. Insulting them, laughing at them, scorning them, belittling them. It begins at the beginning of the thread and carries on through the thread
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
Fuxake, stop snivelling. This site as been institutionally anti Nat (or Nit as you would describe it) for as long as I’ve been on it. I’m sure if all I want is to bathe in my own spit-warm world view there are other places for me to go.
lol!
I make a perfectly reasonable and measured point and get verbal abuse in return. Kinda proves my point
And FWIW I note that, amongst regular commenters, we have more Nits than Reformers
And yet the SNP at most take 3% of the polls, Reform on a good day take 30%
This site has a problem, and this thread reveals it. It is endlessly anti Reform. Insulting them, laughing at them, scorning them, belittling them. It begins at the beginning of the thread and carries on through the thread
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
Fuxake, stop snivelling. This site as been institutionally anti Nat (or Nit as you would describe it) for as long as I’ve been on it. I’m sure if all I want is to bathe in my own spit-warm world view there are other places for me to go.
lol!
I make a perfectly reasonable and measured point and get verbal abuse in return. Kinda proves my point
And FWIW I note that, amongst regular commenters, we have more Nits than Reformers
And yet the SNP at most take 3% of the polls, Reform on a good day take 30%
Milquetoast Leon thinks that’s verbal abuse, dearie me. You’re going soft in your old age.
From the previous thread: That Guardian list does not include Huckleberry Finn, or any book by Asimov, Clark, or Heinlein.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a good friend, recently. We agreed that, if men want to understand women, they should read a few romance novels -- and if women want to understand men, they should read a few war histories.
As I recall, Disraeli made a similar point way back when.
(For the record: I haven't taken my own advice, but haven't given up on the idea.)
Histories doesn't really come into it, though. Otherwise Caro or Levi would be all over the list.
But good point about science fiction (and genre in general); it ought to be far better represented.
Twain (somewhat ironically given where he stood politically) is rather unfairly a victim of the bad words police.
Comments
I needed a treat so on Thursday I went to a good local gastropub (2.5k Google reviews, average 4.5 *) for lunch called the Carnarvon in Teversal, which is a bit of Nottinghamshire that looks like Derbyshire just before you get to Derbyshire (so local Councillors for here like living there). I'd call it mid-range - decent quality with some on site cookery, but many items brought in pre-prepared. I imagine my Creme Brulee was bought in and the sugar sprinkled and grilled on the spot.
Fixed prices were £20.95 2 courses, £24.95 3 courses. Plus drinks. That £20.95 is a clear adjustment from the obvious £19.95 price point. The clientele were business meetings, locals lunching (especially pensioners, mums etc), co-workers using laptops to coordinate in the pub lunch section, anniversaries (one group of 10).
They could push their prices a little and still do OK I think. But it has a longstanding good reputation.
I'm guessing Green Party?
https://x.com/baseballot/status/2055309076209492208?s=20
Honestly what a bunch of assholes @ABC
https://x.com/NateSilver538/status/2055335385757077676?s=20
BTW, I approached ABC about buying back the former FiveThirtyEight IP*, and they said they wouldn't sell at any price because I'd criticized their management of the brand. Costing Disney shareholders $$ b/c of their vindictiveness.
* I own the models but the trademarks, etc.
https://x.com/NateSilver538/status/2055353919585325333?s=20
The Union flag tailights on a Mini are a celebration of its Britishness and is to be commended. Sticking a flag of St George on a lamppost in a Republican estate in West Belfast has anything but peaceful intent.
The lamp post zip-tie ones from last summer are pretty filthy and frayed now. I see this as allegorical of the decline of the country.
But I wonder if a leader not from London will make a positive impact just by the virtue of killing the idea that Labour is a southern party that doesn’t understand the north.
Jon Ayre
@jonayre.uk
I think they posted the "100 books you're most likely to be forced to read for your English GCSE" list by mistake?
https://bsky.app/profile/jonayre.uk/post/3mlxfohxsjk2a
Flying flags for Ukraine against a common enemy, or France for "Je suis Charlie" or Palestine or Israel might be more problematic.
Flying a flag as a threat should not be allowed.
The Hormuz Letter
@HormuzLetter
BREAKING: Trump to decide within the next 24 hours on major military action against Iran, with Israel receiving the final answer in the same window, per Channel 12. A senior Israeli official said the resumption of the war is "near" and Israel is preparing for "several days to several weeks" of fighting.
https://x.com/HormuzLetter/status/2055546894491832686
===
So cue announcement that he has pulled back from military action thanks to a new note from the Iranians passed by Pakistan which is worth considering, just in time for the markets to open on Monday.
The Hormuz Letter
@HormuzLetter
BREAKING: Trump to decide within the next 24 hours on major military action against Iran, with Israel receiving the final answer in the same window, per Channel 12. A senior Israeli official said the resumption of the war is "near" and Israel is preparing for "several days to several weeks" of fighting.
https://x.com/HormuzLetter/status/2055546894491832686
===
So cue announcement that he has pulled back from military action thanks to a new note from the Iranians passed by Pakistan which is worth considering, just in time for the markets to open on Monday.
What matters is that they have good judgement and good policies which they can implement
If an opinion is colourable, then giving equal treatment is entirely fair. Arguments for and against Brexit are colourable.
What the BBC would not do is give a platform to someone disputing that the Holocaust took place, as such an opinion is not colourable.
I was in Glasgow last October. In NW Glasgow, 50/50 Scotland/Palestine flags were being flown from lampposts; in N Glasgow it was all Saltires.
My string suspicion was that the main aim of each group of flag flyers was to annoy the other lot, and that the views of actual Palestinians or any other group were almost incidental.
Yesterday, Israel said it targeted the Hamas leader in Gaza in an airstrike, although there was no immediate confirmation he was killed.
Unless something changes fairly radically by November there is going to be a blue wave for the Democrats there. And most of the changes that seem to coming (or not coming in respect of the Straits of Hormuz) look very bad for Trump and the GOP. My guess at the moment is that the Dems will have a lead of something like 30 in the House although I still think that the Senate is a struggle.
Should we be paying attention to other strong woman in the background when it comes to the next coronation?
Meanwhile Trump is planning to use taxpayers money to fund a $1.7 billion fund to distribute amongst the Jan 6 rioters and other election deniers.
It isn't going to be free and fair elections, at least in many States.
What I am arguing against is this absurd notion of "balance" by the BBC which develops into Andrea Leadsom being given expertise parity with WTO Chair, Pascal Lamy.
I don't believe even the BBC go to the extent of giving flat eartherers equality to demonstrate the Earth is not round.
But they do use people like Mark Regev and Elon Levy as impartial commentators to the war in Gaza as a foil, just in case viewers take exception to the unbiased, (not-hostile- to-Palestine) Jeremy Bowen.
The reality is decades of increasingly London centric government.
https://x.com/ITVWales/status/2055344209880662519?s=20
Well his twitter handle made me chuckle. Its pretty pathetic turd herding outrage clicks from the journalist.
A district in Louisiana, a district in Tennessee, a district Mississippi, a district in Alabama perhaps.
What's potentially more damaging for the Dems is that the extra four districts they're trying to gerrymander for themselves in Virginia has been put on hold by the courts.
But its all a +/- at the edges.
If the Dems are 5% ahead nationally they will get a comfortable majority in the House, if they are 10% ahead (which they should be) then they will get a landslide majority.
https://bsky.app/profile/nbcnews.com/post/3mlqw5tovkm2w
But given a choice between Burnham as PM and Matthew Goodwin as an MP, I'll take Burnham.
It was a March March March.
https://x.com/gerscollective/status/2055554983999725662?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
It was a lunar eclipse, or something. Round here is very flat: the highest point you can get for looking at astronomical phenomena on the horizon is the pedestrian bridge over the M60. The family and I traipsed up there to see what we could see. A balding middle aged man in vaguely military attire saw us and sat awkwardly in his bag, lookung away from us and making no convversation or eye contact. I spotted the flaggery in his bag that he was trying to conceal with his bum. After ten cheerful but unsuccessful minutes of astronomy incongruously accompanied by a tense man, we left, no doubt to his great relief, only to pass a happy Pakistani family with the same idea. I expect he had a succession of these experiences all evening.
The only person I knew with a flagpole was the Lord Lieutenant and we mercilessly took the p1ss
With Burnham:
LAB: 45%
RFM: 42%
Without Burnham:
RFM: 53%
LAB: 27%
Via
@Survation
.
Methodology Below.
https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/2055612371930882130
Burnham in.
Great to meet my old PE teacher, the legend that is Mr O’D, whilst campaigning in Ashton.
Once told me I couldn’t play football for the school amymore if I didn’t play rugby league as I wasn’t tough enough.
Sound advice which will stand me in good stead in this campaign!
You have to step back a bit to notice it but then, boy, do you notice it
The problem is that Reform is, by a distance, the most popular political party in the country. Looking at PB you would imagine they were some tiny but dangerous radical group, supported by very few but menacing society
I’ve never known PB so out of kilter with British public opinion. On a site that likes to make bets on British politics this is a very bad thing. It’s like what happened to Bluesky
http://www.marchmarchmarch.org.uk/
Just because somebody is popular - and Reform are not actually *that* popular, their polling is comparable to the voteshare Major got in 1997 or Hague in 2001 - doesn't mean they're not dangerous.
Honestly, after the utter shitshow of the Nancy Experiment, the bhois should never have been within sniffing distance of the SPL championship. Of course, that will be little comfort if they don't beat the jambos.
It's not quite as warm as it has been, but still fairly mild.
Step back and read the thread
@metpoliceuk
·
1h
Officers have made two arrests in the vicinity of Euston station.
Two men, wanted on suspicion of GBH following an incident in Birmingham where a man was run over, were spotted arriving into London to attend the UTK protest.
https://x.com/metpoliceuk/status/2055598490860847247
I make a perfectly reasonable and measured point and get verbal abuse in return. Kinda proves my point
And FWIW I note that, amongst regular commenters, we have more Nits than Reformers
And yet the SNP at most take 3% of the polls, Reform on a good day take 30%
I think I'll wait for some real polling.
Which reminds me of a conversation I had with a good friend, recently. We agreed that, if men want to understand women, they should read a few romance novels -- and if women want to understand men, they should read a few war histories.
As I recall, Disraeli made a similar point way back when.
(For the record: I haven't taken my own advice, but haven't given up on the idea.)
Otherwise Caro or Levi would be all over the list.
But good point about science fiction (and genre in general); it ought to be far better represented.
Twain (somewhat ironically given where he stood politically) is rather unfairly a victim of the bad words police.