A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Pedant time... it's quite possible to do so, so why don't you?
I think he's lumbered with a job. But once that's out the way ...
There are many issues that Reform could campaign on but seem to concentrate on immigration. They are often tagged as racist and may be so. Or they could be very good political operators that see an hot-button issue that will never be solved over this next generation. Local news highlighting the large drop in primary school intake (10% - 13%) compared to a decade ago. This compares to Adult Social Care and SEND eating up Local Authority budgets.
So the usual reminder that Reform and Restore don't have solutions. Or if their solutions were implemented we'd (aka the young taxpayers) be in a very difficult position in terms of supporting the domestic population. Remove immigration and the line drops significantly.
Do you realise that not all immigrants are net tax contributors ?
The young taxpayers will be funding not just oldies but also many of the immigrants.
The table shows *net* immigration. Behind that is 700K of immigration on current policies of high starting salaries i.e. net contributors. Look at Kemi's parentage. Were they here for the benefits? Or even Anushka Asthana who has been mentioned before. Were her parents here for benefits? Look at the wider picture rather than the myopic one.
Its you who is being myopic by talking about individuals.
Take a look at inner cities of Birmingham or Bradford or Dewsbury or Blackburn.
If all immigrants were net contributors then these would be among the most affluent parts of the country.
The reality is they're not and they're not.
Immigrants vary in who they are and the socioeconomic effects they have.
And believing that all immigrants are net contributors is somewhere between extreme gullibility and willfull mendacity.
ONS doesn't seem to agree with you. West Midlands seems to have a high domestic population. London and the S East has higher levels than West Midlands.
🚨New: Fresh Labour infighting has broken out over Darren Jones’ future
Jones met a small number of female Labour MPs amidst the anger of his Mandelson messages - but two in the wider party have called on him to go
Jones’ supporters rallied behind him last night, with one telling @SkyNews he was the victim of a ‘character assassination’ coming from rival leadership camps
An interesting one. People focus (a lot) on Labour's reputation for anti-semitism but fail to report on the misogyny. Personally, misogyny gets second billing nationally but is a far wider problem that anti-semitism.
And calling it ‘character assassination’ fits squarely in the DARVO box. He should be toast.
I am not sure he was ever bread. 'Rival leadership camps' - OK Darren.
🚨New: Fresh Labour infighting has broken out over Darren Jones’ future
Jones met a small number of female Labour MPs amidst the anger of his Mandelson messages - but two in the wider party have called on him to go
Jones’ supporters rallied behind him last night, with one telling @SkyNews he was the victim of a ‘character assassination’ coming from rival leadership camps
He's definitely one of the more able performers when interviewed. Is the misogyny accusation because he's linked to Mandelson or is there something else?
A real election result from tonight. (Figures from the VoteUK forum).
"Westmorland & Furness: Hawcoat & New Barn
Reform gain from Conservative, with change since 2022 in brackets
Reform 1,139 (48.4%/new) Labour 576 (24.5%/-10.9%) Conservative 447 (19%/-22.9%) Green 121 (5.1%/new) Liberal democrat 69 (2.9%/-2.9%)"
Kemis new Con Army in meltdown
Reform and Restore to it's Right and no one believing it's current Leadership is anything but Right Wing Tory.
She can wear pale Blue, sky Blue , light Blue, the Tories will only be considered credible, relevant , electable wen they find a new Leader who is a genuine mature centre right Politician
I think keeping Kemi is probably the Tories best option, not so much because she is good, more that all the alternatives are even worse.
In a political environment where both Reform and Restore are campaigning as overtly racist, voters are not going to switch to a right wing party led by a Black woman.
If they like that racially divisive politics they will vote Reform/Restore, if they loathe it they will vote Lab/LD/Green/SNP/PC.
Her best chance is to get completely away from the Culture War Social Media stuff and concentrate on bread and butter issues that matter to the voters such as the economy, taxation and education.
Badenoch is trying to eat Farage's lunch. If I were a Tory (which thankfully I am not) I would be very nervous for the next general election.
Despite the ramping on here, I see incompetence of an order we would not see with Cleverly or Hunt as LOTO. David Cameron writing her speeches and prepping her for PMQs does not change that.
OMG, how dare a female Conservative politician follow in the footsteps on her female predessors as a leader of her party and then have the temerity to have the political intelligence and charisma along with an ability to think on her feet and tell it like it is?!
Are you going to South Aberdeen and putting this point to the voters there? Surely the open racism and sexism you allege would be a vote winner for Kemi there. Tories should be a shoe-in.
As a matter of interest has Badenoch been up to campaign in either or both of the Scottish byelections? Or any Labour front bencher?
If not, why not?
OMG!! You have literally just nailed my earlier point about the lack of any media coverage of the other two Westminster by-elections in the media and your ignorance of the campaigns or likely outcomes. And yes, Kemi Badenoch has been up campaigning here for the Scottish Conservatives unlike Keir Starmer or Nigel Farage!!
Do you think that the SCon will do better in Aberdeen South than losing half their vote, bearing in mind they did that just 6 weeks ago in the Holyrood elections?
Here is a thought, why don't you bother to go look up the performance of the Scottish Conservative candidates in some of the key North East Holyrood constituencies despite the performance of Reform in the area, and when you do, don't let your patronising lack of knowledge hit your behookie on the way out!!
In their key targets SCon did OK both this year and in 24. That's not to say Aberdeen South is in the bag - far from it - but SNP may have reasons to be nervous if the by election turns into a referendum on oil and gas.
Morning,
I see Aberdeen south is causing some debate on here, allow me to wade in. The odds on a Tory gain here have dropped a fair bit since they came out, Tories down to 7/4 on some bookies. I'd say this is about right, SNP are still favs, but only marginal given the way things have been going for them the last fortnight.
Foxy is right on the stats, Scots Cons did lose more than half their seats and roughly half their % vote at last months election, but their vote held up a lot better in Aberdeenshire (including Aberdeen Deeside and North Kincardine, the new name for the seat equivalent to Aberdeen South), getting more than 30% of the vote. Stephen Flynn only got back in by 1,244 votes. The real Tory massacre was on the list.
There's a lot of anxiety in Aberdeen area re the future direction of the oil industry and a lot of mud being slung around the political scene, it'll be a tighter contest than initially expected.
It'll come down to whether enough Reform voters hold their nose and tactically vote Tory to kick out the SNP. As in by elections, they aren't often 3 way contests and I'd expect Labour to tail off. Tories should be no worse than 2nd, they'll beat Reform, but SNP still favs. Lab at 40/1 is a fantastic bet if anyone thinks they'll improve on their 2024 vote share (I don't, they took a pasting last month in Scotland).
Although they only won by 859 votes over Labour in 2024, Arbroath and Broughty Ferry should be a shoo in for the SNP. Lab vote is well down on then, and that's before the Reform surge is factored in. Lab currently around 7/1 here.
The SNP have a more experienced candidate in Aberdeen South, had it been the other way round I'd say they'd be in more trouble. I expect it'll still be another rough 10 days ahead for John Swinney so it's worth factoring that in too
I watched Question Time for the first time in a couple of years last night. A brief summary. Reform have picked a duffer. Rob looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights, and his biggest weakness, more significant than his social media history, was that he just doesn't know, or understand, much at all. Burnham was just Burnham. The Tory was quite appealing - civilised, pleasant and reasonable, rather old school. The other two (Green and Lib Dem) didn't really register much, though they were both much more articulate than Rob.
I really don't understand why Reform have put up such a weak candidate (though I don't mind). The contrast between sassy Hannah the plumber in Gorton & Denton and Rob the plumber in Makerfield is huge, irrespective of their political stances.
Reform's problem is that Farage wants to lead a protest movement not an alternative future government.
So its going to be a series of untrained candidates and undeveloped policies.
Farage should have been using his donated money to turn Reform into a professional outfit.
Turning Reform into a professional outfit has been the objective since Zia Yusuf became the organisation boss a couple of years ago, and Gawain Towler was defenestrated, followed by Zia self-defenestrating, and both being subsequently undefenestrated sideways iirc.
They have around 120 staff.
So it all depends on the quality of the staff and the management.
I've been on here a very long time and to be honest, yes, it's male dominated and by those of a certain age and my response is so what? We don't pretend to be an accurate barometer of the nation's thinking or a guide to the pulse, zeitgeist or whatever.
We are what we are.
That doesn't mean anyone posting here should feel uncomfortable or threatened - offended or patronised is different. This is the bearpit after all and some of the bears (of both genders) have claws.
As to political leanings, the site moves around depending on who is posting regularly (say 10-20 posts a day). There's a strong conservative feel not surprising given the demographics but that doesn't translate to Conservative apart from a few frequent Tory activists, ex members or those who wish the Blessed Margaret was still alive and running the country.
The "betting" element is not what it was speaking of which it's the Oaks this afternoon at Epsom. Not easy to call but I think LEGACY LINK could be the one - I'm on A LA PROCHAINE each way but she's drifting like a barge which doesn't inspire confidence.
I'd like to see Legacy win. The Coolmore machine for me is draining much of the romance out of the game. But their first string is the right fav here imo and I'll probably back that. Otoh I don't fancy their Derby fav tomorrow. Course that leaves their other 4 runners.
There are many issues that Reform could campaign on but seem to concentrate on immigration. They are often tagged as racist and may be so. Or they could be very good political operators that see an hot-button issue that will never be solved over this next generation. Local news highlighting the large drop in primary school intake (10% - 13%) compared to a decade ago. This compares to Adult Social Care and SEND eating up Local Authority budgets.
So the usual reminder that Reform and Restore don't have solutions. Or if their solutions were implemented we'd (aka the young taxpayers) be in a very difficult position in terms of supporting the domestic population. Remove immigration and the line drops significantly.
Do you realise that not all immigrants are net tax contributors ?
The young taxpayers will be funding not just oldies but also many of the immigrants.
The table shows *net* immigration. Behind that is 700K of immigration on current policies of high starting salaries i.e. net contributors. Look at Kemi's parentage. Were they here for the benefits? Or even Anushka Asthana who has been mentioned before. Were her parents here for benefits? Look at the wider picture rather than the myopic one.
Its you who is being myopic by talking about individuals.
Take a look at inner cities of Birmingham or Bradford or Dewsbury or Blackburn.
If all immigrants were net contributors then these would be among the most affluent parts of the country.
The reality is they're not and they're not.
Immigrants vary in who they are and the socioeconomic effects they have.
And believing that all immigrants are net contributors is somewhere between extreme gullibility and willfull mendacity.
"Take a look at inner cities of Birmingham or Bradford or Dewsbury or Blackburn. If all immigrants were net contributors then these would be among the most affluent parts of the country."
A risible argument, and it would be even without the added straw man you created by using "all".
There are many issues that Reform could campaign on but seem to concentrate on immigration. They are often tagged as racist and may be so. Or they could be very good political operators that see an hot-button issue that will never be solved over this next generation. Local news highlighting the large drop in primary school intake (10% - 13%) compared to a decade ago. This compares to Adult Social Care and SEND eating up Local Authority budgets.
So the usual reminder that Reform and Restore don't have solutions. Or if their solutions were implemented we'd (aka the young taxpayers) be in a very difficult position in terms of supporting the domestic population. Remove immigration and the line drops significantly.
Do you realise that not all immigrants are net tax contributors ?
The young taxpayers will be funding not just oldies but also many of the immigrants.
Immigrants do have a higher employment rate than natives.
The dependency ratio is not purely about tax either. There is a need for workers to keep essential services and industries going like Social Care, agriculture, food processing and building even if these are often poorly paid.
Yep exactly. If a minimum wage carer enables a highly qualified professional to return to work (rather than care for a relative), overall output and tax take is significantly increased.
That’s why the chat about only importing “net contributors” is so weak, and even more so if you consider they are crowding out young ambitious Brits who might want a good job. Much more honest (and defendable tbh) to oppose immigration in general.
Your regular reminder that 75-80% of people in the care homes are UK nationals.
The "they can't be bothered to wipe bums" thing is untrue.
That is despite the care home owners selling a pile of visas - because nearly no-one on such a visa ended up working in a care home. Which is why the government shutdown direct recruitment from abroad.
A real election result from tonight. (Figures from the VoteUK forum).
"Westmorland & Furness: Hawcoat & New Barn
Reform gain from Conservative, with change since 2022 in brackets
Reform 1,139 (48.4%/new) Labour 576 (24.5%/-10.9%) Conservative 447 (19%/-22.9%) Green 121 (5.1%/new) Liberal democrat 69 (2.9%/-2.9%)"
Kemis new Con Army in meltdown
Reform and Restore to it's Right and no one believing it's current Leadership is anything but Right Wing Tory.
She can wear pale Blue, sky Blue , light Blue, the Tories will only be considered credible, relevant , electable wen they find a new Leader who is a genuine mature centre right Politician
I think keeping Kemi is probably the Tories best option, not so much because she is good, more that all the alternatives are even worse.
In a political environment where both Reform and Restore are campaigning as overtly racist, voters are not going to switch to a right wing party led by a Black woman.
If they like that racially divisive politics they will vote Reform/Restore, if they loathe it they will vote Lab/LD/Green/SNP/PC.
Her best chance is to get completely away from the Culture War Social Media stuff and concentrate on bread and butter issues that matter to the voters such as the economy, taxation and education.
Badenoch is trying to eat Farage's lunch. If I were a Tory (which thankfully I am not) I would be very nervous for the next general election.
Despite the ramping on here, I see incompetence of an order we would not see with Cleverly or Hunt as LOTO. David Cameron writing her speeches and prepping her for PMQs does not change that.
OMG, how dare a female Conservative politician follow in the footsteps on her female predessors as a leader of her party and then have the temerity to have the political intelligence and charisma along with an ability to think on her feet and tell it like it is?!
Are you going to South Aberdeen and putting this point to the voters there? Surely the open racism and sexism you allege would be a vote winner for Kemi there. Tories should be a shoe-in.
As a matter of interest has Badenoch been up to campaign in either or both of the Scottish byelections? Or any Labour front bencher?
If not, why not?
OMG!! You have literally just nailed my earlier point about the lack of any media coverage of the other two Westminster by-elections in the media and your ignorance of the campaigns or likely outcomes. And yes, Kemi Badenoch has been up campaigning here for the Scottish Conservatives unlike Keir Starmer or Nigel Farage!!
Do you think that the SCon will do better in Aberdeen South than losing half their vote, bearing in mind they did that just 6 weeks ago in the Holyrood elections?
Poor information gives more opinions. At the 2026 Holyrood election, in Aberdeen Deeside and North Kincardshire (mostly overlapping with Aberdeen South boundaries), the SCon vote fell by 7.5% to 30.5%. The SNP had to have their star striker (Stephen Flynn) in to win it, getting 34.1%, down 8.2% - 1,244 votes in it. Reform cost SCon with 17.7%. The 2024 GE result was SNP 32.8%, Lab 24.7%, Con 24.4%.
Yes Badenoch has been there. If you don't even know that, not sure how you can speak with such confidence. Conservatives are working this very hard. SNP seem distracted for some reason, suspect a lot of there vote will stay at home. Labour barely appear to be trying. Reform, who knows.
2/1 is good value. Had been 15/8, drifted to 5/2, now back to 2/1 (7/4 at many places). Would imagine that the Conservatives will be disappointed if they don't get this.
On Arbroath, would expect an SNP hold, which would be massively disappointing for Labour. They should not be 8/1 in a seat they lost by only 859 votes in 2024. Reform seem the value at 20/1, but I really can't see them doing it.
Makerfield - this survey feels about right to me (but what may I know). I would be concerned though that the most popular politician in the entire party, in a by-election, in an area they have never lost, in a place he has 'connections' to and is the local mayor....is only 10% in the lead. Burnham's problems will be his mid-term blues will be at general election time. His honeymoon will be well and truly over, unless he calls a GE. In which he will be very unpopular for calling an unnecessary GE.
After watching the Reforn candidate on Question Time and seeing you can get Burnham at 1/4 and knowing it's a two horse race isn't it worth putting the farm on him?
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
This by election is Reform v not Reform. OK. It isn't really because it's sui generis. A governing party candidate running to usurp the government. And a class performer v some local semi pros. But it does point up how a GE could go if it becomes framed as Reform v not Reform. Rather than Labour v not Labour.
I really think that's a mistaken reading. If it weren't for the Burnham effect I think Reform would be on over 50% in this seat* - it is 32nd on their target list after all - and all the tactical voting in the world wouldn't be able to stop them.
Secondly, it's a bazillion times easier to work out the tactical voting choice in a by-election involving a main character like Burnham, than in hundreds of different seats at a GE. Even look at how the not Reform vote was split in Gorton and Denton.
In many ways I think the next GE will be one where there's a vicious battle to establish who is the tactical voting choice in each seat to defeat Reform in the GE afterwards. And the aftermath of the GE will determine whether the Tories are part of the not Reform opposition or prepared to play the role of Farage's little helpers.
* The latest More in Common MRP has Reform on 46% and the Tories on 10% in Makerfield. In a mid-term by-election you might even expect the Reform vote to exceed 60%. If they only end up with ~40% that's not a result of anti-Reform tactical voting, that's Burnham winning over otherwise Reform voters.
As someone who has talked with tens of thousands of voters of all kinds, I think it's important to remember that classifying them as "Reform voters" or "Labour voters" or anything else is a very rough approximation. Basically one should, time permitting, be willing to talk with anyone, and you often find common ground with someone who is in theory in a quite different place on the left-right spectrum. Fortunately! - as otherwise we would be in a state of permanent conflict.
Most of us here are habitual voters for one party or another, which biases us to think the same of most (normal) people who don't think about politics seriously most of the time. But even here we sometimes agree with someone unexpected, which makes the site so much more interesting than if it was a daily clash between ultra-partisans.
I watched Question Time for the first time in a couple of years last night. A brief summary. Reform have picked a duffer. Rob looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights, and his biggest weakness, more significant than his social media history, was that he just doesn't know, or understand, much at all. Burnham was just Burnham. The Tory was quite appealing - civilised, pleasant and reasonable, rather old school. The other two (Green and Lib Dem) didn't really register much, though they were both much more articulate than Rob.
I really don't understand why Reform have put up such a weak candidate (though I don't mind). The contrast between sassy Hannah the plumber in Gorton & Denton and Rob the plumber in Makerfield is huge, irrespective of their political stances.
Reform's problem is that Farage wants to lead a protest movement not an alternative future government.
So its going to be a series of untrained candidates and undeveloped policies.
Farage should have been using his donated money to turn Reform into a professional outfit.
Turning Reform into a professional outfit has been the objective since Zia Yusuf became the organisation boss a couple of years ago, and Gawain Towler was defenestrated, followed by Zia self-defenestrating, and both being subsequently undefenestrated sideways iirc.
They have around 120 staff.
So it all depends on the quality of the staff and the management.
I'd suggest this is the key factor for Reform (excluding Nigel). Scaling up any organisation is difficult unless you have lots of cash. Scaling up what is essentially a volunteer led organisation is even more difficult so Yusuf has a job on his hands.
I've excluded Nigel as he appears to be no more than a media tart with a side line in grift. The 'true believers' will still be there as they are in the US but whether the skill base and commitment is there, is still unproven. The Makerfield candidate suggests Yusuf still has a long way to go.
I watched Question Time for the first time in a couple of years last night. A brief summary. Reform have picked a duffer. Rob looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights, and his biggest weakness, more significant than his social media history, was that he just doesn't know, or understand, much at all. Burnham was just Burnham. The Tory was quite appealing - civilised, pleasant and reasonable, rather old school. The other two (Green and Lib Dem) didn't really register much, though they were both much more articulate than Rob.
I really don't understand why Reform have put up such a weak candidate (though I don't mind). The contrast between sassy Hannah the plumber in Gorton & Denton and Rob the plumber in Makerfield is huge, irrespective of their political stances.
Reform's problem is that Farage wants to lead a protest movement not an alternative future government.
So its going to be a series of untrained candidates and undeveloped policies.
Farage should have been using his donated money to turn Reform into a professional outfit.
Turning Reform into a professional outfit has been the objective since Zia Yusuf became the organisation boss a couple of years ago, and Gawain Towler was defenestrated, followed by Zia self-defenestrating, and both being subsequently undefenestrated sideways iirc.
They have around 120 staff.
So it all depends on the quality of the staff and the management.
Let me put a sourcing note on that number. That is an AI suggestion in response to "how many staff are there in Reform UK", which is source to their LinkedIn page where they are in the "50-200" category, where previously it as been in the "10-50" category, plus 119 LinkedIn members are quoted as listing Reform UK as their current workplace on linkedin.
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
That attitude was often literal - gobbing at gigs being a definite thing. I wasn't keen on that aspect. Some of the music I did like at the time (I was bang on the right age for it) but very little of the genre has made it onto my playlists today.
I had a couple of friends who were punks. Seriously committed to it, gobbing and all.
Most of us thought punk was shit, but we respected the commitment.
There are many issues that Reform could campaign on but seem to concentrate on immigration. They are often tagged as racist and may be so. Or they could be very good political operators that see an hot-button issue that will never be solved over this next generation. Local news highlighting the large drop in primary school intake (10% - 13%) compared to a decade ago. This compares to Adult Social Care and SEND eating up Local Authority budgets.
So the usual reminder that Reform and Restore don't have solutions. Or if their solutions were implemented we'd (aka the young taxpayers) be in a very difficult position in terms of supporting the domestic population. Remove immigration and the line drops significantly.
Do you realise that not all immigrants are net tax contributors ?
The young taxpayers will be funding not just oldies but also many of the immigrants.
The table shows *net* immigration. Behind that is 700K of immigration on current policies of high starting salaries i.e. net contributors. Look at Kemi's parentage. Were they here for the benefits? Or even Anushka Asthana who has been mentioned before. Were her parents here for benefits? Look at the wider picture rather than the myopic one.
Its you who is being myopic by talking about individuals.
Take a look at inner cities of Birmingham or Bradford or Dewsbury or Blackburn.
If all immigrants were net contributors then these would be among the most affluent parts of the country.
The reality is they're not and they're not.
Immigrants vary in who they are and the socioeconomic effects they have.
And believing that all immigrants are net contributors is somewhere between extreme gullibility and willfull mendacity.
"Take a look at inner cities of Birmingham or Bradford or Dewsbury or Blackburn. If all immigrants were net contributors then these would be among the most affluent parts of the country."
A risible argument, and it would be even without the added straw man you created by using "all".
My point is that some immigrants are more successful in this country than others and some immigrant communities are more successful in this country than others.
I would hope that this was by now undeniable.
And this reality needs to be taken into account when deciding immigration policy.
As opposed to the bleating of 'more immigrants needed, more immigrants needed, more immigrants needed' with little interest as to who they are.
Or the bizarre idea that low skilled immigrants might be better as they don't compete with Britons for high skilled jobs.
I watched Question Time for the first time in a couple of years last night. A brief summary. Reform have picked a duffer. Rob looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights, and his biggest weakness, more significant than his social media history, was that he just doesn't know, or understand, much at all. Burnham was just Burnham. The Tory was quite appealing - civilised, pleasant and reasonable, rather old school. The other two (Green and Lib Dem) didn't really register much, though they were both much more articulate than Rob.
I really don't understand why Reform have put up such a weak candidate (though I don't mind). The contrast between sassy Hannah the plumber in Gorton & Denton and Rob the plumber in Makerfield is huge, irrespective of their political stances.
Kenyon was the incumbent candidate fro, 2024 so I get why inertia may have carried him.
As for why him, why not? The assumption amongst many parties is that northerners are thick, so have a candidate to match. From a posh southern Reform perspective that lot don't know any better, just shout immigrants at them and they'll vote for anything.
The comedy is that last night highlighted the real choice here. If people want change there is a candidate who is articulate, passionate, creative and has a clear plan to change how stuff gets done. Or you have Mr women are slags.
Reform's vote has been sliding for a while nationally, the "tight" claim of this by-election now replaced by a 10pt Burnham lead, and I expect that to widen further.
Reform should be very happy that the Restore candidate was not allowed on Question Time she would been shown to be the sane choice.
Equally I doubt many Makerfield voters actually watched the program so the only bit that may cross over is more confirmation that the Reform candidate isn’t very bright
The saner choice of the insane choices, perhaps. Not withstanding the polls, it does feel like we are hitting peak Farage, and a combo of a recovering Kemi and the prospect of Labour stopping their hole digging shenanigans might just knock NF back a fair deal.
I am certainly not backing Farage to lead the largest party next time.
In the wider world, and maybe related, it also feels like Trump and Putin may be heading towards their last hurrah... well we can certainly hope so,
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
There are some posters on the site who think Rishi Sunak is a liberal lefty sell out. There are others who think Starmer is a Thatcherite clone class traitor. It is unlikely that we will all share a similar perception of whether the site skews left or right.
This by election is Reform v not Reform. OK. It isn't really because it's sui generis. A governing party candidate running to usurp the government. And a class performer v some local semi pros. But it does point up how a GE could go if it becomes framed as Reform v not Reform. Rather than Labour v not Labour.
I really think that's a mistaken reading. If it weren't for the Burnham effect I think Reform would be on over 50% in this seat* - it is 32nd on their target list after all - and all the tactical voting in the world wouldn't be able to stop them.
Secondly, it's a bazillion times easier to work out the tactical voting choice in a by-election involving a main character like Burnham, than in hundreds of different seats at a GE. Even look at how the not Reform vote was split in Gorton and Denton.
In many ways I think the next GE will be one where there's a vicious battle to establish who is the tactical voting choice in each seat to defeat Reform in the GE afterwards. And the aftermath of the GE will determine whether the Tories are part of the not Reform opposition or prepared to play the role of Farage's little helpers.
* The latest More in Common MRP has Reform on 46% and the Tories on 10% in Makerfield. In a mid-term by-election you might even expect the Reform vote to exceed 60%. If they only end up with ~40% that's not a result of anti-Reform tactical voting, that's Burnham winning over otherwise Reform voters.
As someone who has talked with tens of thousands of voters of all kinds, I think it's important to remember that classifying them as "Reform voters" or "Labour voters" or anything else is a very rough approximation. Basically one should, time permitting, be willing to talk with anyone, and you often find common ground with someone who is in theory in a quite different place on the left-right spectrum. Fortunately! - as otherwise we would be in a state of permanent conflict.
Most of us here are habitual voters for one party or another, which biases us to think the same of most (normal) people who don't think about politics seriously most of the time. But even here we sometimes agree with someone unexpected, which makes the site so much more interesting than if it was a daily clash between ultra-partisans.
I think that's spot on Nick.
With politics in such a state of flux, it's also an argument for keeping campaigning simple. With tribal loyalties much diminished there is a greater case for blanket leafleting of every home rather than (at significantly extra cost) target hand-delivered mailshots at maybe one in four homes on the false assumption that these are going to be the only swing voters. In what are increasingly multi-party contests, the latter targeted approach also diminishes your visibility and thus makes it harder to claim that your own party is in contention.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
Insomnia in my case.
Where's that? Is it in the Balkans post Yugoslavia?
There are many issues that Reform could campaign on but seem to concentrate on immigration. They are often tagged as racist and may be so. Or they could be very good political operators that see an hot-button issue that will never be solved over this next generation. Local news highlighting the large drop in primary school intake (10% - 13%) compared to a decade ago. This compares to Adult Social Care and SEND eating up Local Authority budgets.
So the usual reminder that Reform and Restore don't have solutions. Or if their solutions were implemented we'd (aka the young taxpayers) be in a very difficult position in terms of supporting the domestic population. Remove immigration and the line drops significantly.
Do you realise that not all immigrants are net tax contributors ?
The young taxpayers will be funding not just oldies but also many of the immigrants.
Immigrants do have a higher employment rate than natives.
The dependency ratio is not purely about tax either. There is a need for workers to keep essential services and industries going like Social Care, agriculture, food processing and building even if these are often poorly paid.
Yep exactly. If a minimum wage carer enables a highly qualified professional to return to work (rather than care for a relative), overall output and tax take is significantly increased.
That’s why the chat about only importing “net contributors” is so weak, and even more so if you consider they are crowding out young ambitious Brits who might want a good job. Much more honest (and defendable tbh) to oppose immigration in general.
Your regular reminder that 75-80% of people in the care homes are UK nationals.
The "they can't be bothered to wipe bums" thing is untrue.
That is despite the care home owners selling a pile of visas - because nearly no-one on such a visa ended up working in a care home. Which is why the government shutdown direct recruitment from abroad.
Likely about 90% in much of the country.
Google shows how the system was abused:
Key Statistics on Care Worker Visas (2023-2025):
Peak Recruitment: In 2023, around 106,000 visas were issued for social care roles, including Health and Care Worker visas.
2024-2025 Decline: The number of visas granted to adult social care staff fell by roughly 90% in 2024 compared to 2023.
2025 Total: Only 13,286 Health and Care Worker visas were granted to main applicants throughout 2025.
2025/26 Trend: Official data shows that international recruitment of care workers has largely ended, with only 303 visas granted to overseas care staff between July and September 2025, during which the ban on overseas recruitment was implemented.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
There are some posters on the site who think Rishi Sunak is a liberal lefty sell out. There are others who think Starmer is a Thatcherite clone class traitor. It is unlikely that we will all share a similar perception of whether the site skews left or right.
The idea that one side or the other sits there with hands nicely folded, when their ideas are challenged is simply wrong.
There has been some very good stuff written on how people perceive challenges to their ideas and the ideas of others - it goes to the heart of the concepts of innate bias.
We see our values as being especially challenged, and perceive the challenges to others much less. Even when the level of challenge is equal.
This is major reason why some retreat to echo chambers.
A real election result from tonight. (Figures from the VoteUK forum).
"Westmorland & Furness: Hawcoat & New Barn
Reform gain from Conservative, with change since 2022 in brackets
Reform 1,139 (48.4%/new) Labour 576 (24.5%/-10.9%) Conservative 447 (19%/-22.9%) Green 121 (5.1%/new) Liberal democrat 69 (2.9%/-2.9%)"
Kemis new Con Army in meltdown
Reform and Restore to it's Right and no one believing it's current Leadership is anything but Right Wing Tory.
She can wear pale Blue, sky Blue , light Blue, the Tories will only be considered credible, relevant , electable wen they find a new Leader who is a genuine mature centre right Politician
I think keeping Kemi is probably the Tories best option, not so much because she is good, more that all the alternatives are even worse.
In a political environment where both Reform and Restore are campaigning as overtly racist, voters are not going to switch to a right wing party led by a Black woman.
If they like that racially divisive politics they will vote Reform/Restore, if they loathe it they will vote Lab/LD/Green/SNP/PC.
Her best chance is to get completely away from the Culture War Social Media stuff and concentrate on bread and butter issues that matter to the voters such as the economy, taxation and education.
Badenoch is trying to eat Farage's lunch. If I were a Tory (which thankfully I am not) I would be very nervous for the next general election.
Despite the ramping on here, I see incompetence of an order we would not see with Cleverly or Hunt as LOTO. David Cameron writing her speeches and prepping her for PMQs does not change that.
OMG, how dare a female Conservative politician follow in the footsteps on her female predessors as a leader of her party and then have the temerity to have the political intelligence and charisma along with an ability to think on her feet and tell it like it is?!
Are you going to South Aberdeen and putting this point to the voters there? Surely the open racism and sexism you allege would be a vote winner for Kemi there. Tories should be a shoe-in.
As a matter of interest has Badenoch been up to campaign in either or both of the Scottish byelections? Or any Labour front bencher?
If not, why not?
OMG!! You have literally just nailed my earlier point about the lack of any media coverage of the other two Westminster by-elections in the media and your ignorance of the campaigns or likely outcomes. And yes, Kemi Badenoch has been up campaigning here for the Scottish Conservatives unlike Keir Starmer or Nigel Farage!!
Do you think that the SCon will do better in Aberdeen South than losing half their vote, bearing in mind they did that just 6 weeks ago in the Holyrood elections?
Poor information gives more opinions. At the 2026 Holyrood election, in Aberdeen Deeside and North Kincardshire (mostly overlapping with Aberdeen South boundaries), the SCon vote fell by 7.5% to 30.5%. The SNP had to have their star striker (Stephen Flynn) in to win it, getting 34.1%, down 8.2% - 1,244 votes in it. Reform cost SCon with 17.7%. The 2024 GE result was SNP 32.8%, Lab 24.7%, Con 24.4%.
Yes Badenoch has been there. If you don't even know that, not sure how you can speak with such confidence. Conservatives are working this very hard. SNP seem distracted for some reason, suspect a lot of there vote will stay at home. Labour barely appear to be trying. Reform, who knows.
2/1 is good value. Had been 15/8, drifted to 5/2, now back to 2/1 (7/4 at many places). Would imagine that the Conservatives will be disappointed if they don't get this.
On Arbroath, would expect an SNP hold, which would be massively disappointing for Labour. They should not be 8/1 in a seat they lost by only 859 votes in 2024. Reform seem the value at 20/1, but I really can't see them doing it.
Makerfield - this survey feels about right to me (but what may I know). I would be concerned though that the most popular politician in the entire party, in a by-election, in an area they have never lost, in a place he has 'connections' to and is the local mayor....is only 10% in the lead. Burnham's problems will be his mid-term blues will be at general election time. His honeymoon will be well and truly over, unless he calls a GE. In which he will be very unpopular for calling an unnecessary GE.
Some good points there, thankyou
On Burnham, if he gets in, and takes over the UK Labour party, I wouldn't expect him to call and early election. I don't think he would, electorate way too volatile right now.
Almost forgot the Greens are standing in Aberdeen South. They stood in relatively few constituencies in May, so the SNP have their own 'Reform' to contend with this time
I watched Question Time for the first time in a couple of years last night. A brief summary. Reform have picked a duffer. Rob looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights, and his biggest weakness, more significant than his social media history, was that he just doesn't know, or understand, much at all. Burnham was just Burnham. The Tory was quite appealing - civilised, pleasant and reasonable, rather old school. The other two (Green and Lib Dem) didn't really register much, though they were both much more articulate than Rob.
I really don't understand why Reform have put up such a weak candidate (though I don't mind). The contrast between sassy Hannah the plumber in Gorton & Denton and Rob the plumber in Makerfield is huge, irrespective of their political stances.
Kenyon was the incumbent candidate fro, 2024 so I get why inertia may have carried him.
As for why him, why not? The assumption amongst many parties is that northerners are thick, so have a candidate to match. From a posh southern Reform perspective that lot don't know any better, just shout immigrants at them and they'll vote for anything.
The comedy is that last night highlighted the real choice here. If people want change there is a candidate who is articulate, passionate, creative and has a clear plan to change how stuff gets done. Or you have Mr women are slags.
Reform's vote has been sliding for a while nationally, the "tight" claim of this by-election now replaced by a 10pt Burnham lead, and I expect that to widen further.
Reform should be very happy that the Restore candidate was not allowed on Question Time she would been shown to be the sane choice.
Equally I doubt many Makerfield voters actually watched the program so the only bit that may cross over is more confirmation that the Reform candidate isn’t very bright
The saner choice of the insane choices, perhaps. Not withstanding the polls, it does feel like we are hitting peak Farage, and a combo of a recovering Kemi and the prospect of Labour stopping their hole digging shenanigans might just knock NF back a fair deal.
I am certainly not backing Farage to lead the largest party next time.
In the wider world, and maybe related, it also feels like Trump and Putin may be heading towards their last hurrah... well we can certainly hope so,
Trump: “Grass has a life also. Like people, grass has a life.”
Not really, william. He's been gaga for a while now.
I like to agree with the orange one on this. Partly because modern research does indicate plants show examples of communication, learning, memory, senses and decision making, which combined is probably enough to say they have intelligence or consciousness, even if it is very different to animal and human intelligence and consciousness.
But mostly, because it makes me feel fine about eating steak.
I've been on here a very long time and to be honest, yes, it's male dominated and by those of a certain age and my response is so what? We don't pretend to be an accurate barometer of the nation's thinking or a guide to the pulse, zeitgeist or whatever.
We are what we are.
That doesn't mean anyone posting here should feel uncomfortable or threatened - offended or patronised is different. This is the bearpit after all and some of the bears (of both genders) have claws.
As to political leanings, the site moves around depending on who is posting regularly (say 10-20 posts a day). There's a strong conservative feel not surprising given the demographics but that doesn't translate to Conservative apart from a few frequent Tory activists, ex members or those who wish the Blessed Margaret was still alive and running the country.
The "betting" element is not what it was speaking of which it's the Oaks this afternoon at Epsom. Not easy to call but I think LEGACY LINK could be the one - I'm on A LA PROCHAINE each way but she's drifting like a barge which doesn't inspire confidence.
I'd like to see Legacy win. The Coolmore machine for me is draining much of the romance out of the game. But their first string is the right fav here imo and I'll probably back that. Otoh I don't fancy their Derby fav tomorrow. Course that leaves their other 4 runners.
I've backed Cameo for the Oaks. Bath University sponsors two races at, well, Bath tonight so if @turbotubbs has been tipped the wink...
I watched Question Time for the first time in a couple of years last night. A brief summary. Reform have picked a duffer. Rob looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights, and his biggest weakness, more significant than his social media history, was that he just doesn't know, or understand, much at all. Burnham was just Burnham. The Tory was quite appealing - civilised, pleasant and reasonable, rather old school. The other two (Green and Lib Dem) didn't really register much, though they were both much more articulate than Rob.
I really don't understand why Reform have put up such a weak candidate (though I don't mind). The contrast between sassy Hannah the plumber in Gorton & Denton and Rob the plumber in Makerfield is huge, irrespective of their political stances.
Kenyon was the incumbent candidate fro, 2024 so I get why inertia may have carried him.
As for why him, why not? The assumption amongst many parties is that northerners are thick, so have a candidate to match. From a posh southern Reform perspective that lot don't know any better, just shout immigrants at them and they'll vote for anything.
The comedy is that last night highlighted the real choice here. If people want change there is a candidate who is articulate, passionate, creative and has a clear plan to change how stuff gets done. Or you have Mr women are slags.
Reform's vote has been sliding for a while nationally, the "tight" claim of this by-election now replaced by a 10pt Burnham lead, and I expect that to widen further.
Reform should be very happy that the Restore candidate was not allowed on Question Time she would been shown to be the sane choice.
Equally I doubt many Makerfield voters actually watched the program so the only bit that may cross over is more confirmation that the Reform candidate isn’t very bright
The saner choice of the insane choices, perhaps. Not withstanding the polls, it does feel like we are hitting peak Farage, and a combo of a recovering Kemi and the prospect of Labour stopping their hole digging shenanigans might just knock NF back a fair deal.
I am certainly not backing Farage to lead the largest party next time.
In the wider world, and maybe related, it also feels like Trump and Putin may be heading towards their last hurrah... well we can certainly hope so,
Trump: “Grass has a life also. Like people, grass has a life.”
Not really, william. He's been gaga for a while now.
When JD Vance comes in with the 25th Amendment he will be using the catchphrase I still recall from a very voluble sales or marketing (forgot which) trainer very early in my career as to what he said he said to non-deliverers:
There are many issues that Reform could campaign on but seem to concentrate on immigration. They are often tagged as racist and may be so. Or they could be very good political operators that see an hot-button issue that will never be solved over this next generation. Local news highlighting the large drop in primary school intake (10% - 13%) compared to a decade ago. This compares to Adult Social Care and SEND eating up Local Authority budgets.
So the usual reminder that Reform and Restore don't have solutions. Or if their solutions were implemented we'd (aka the young taxpayers) be in a very difficult position in terms of supporting the domestic population. Remove immigration and the line drops significantly.
Do you realise that not all immigrants are net tax contributors ?
The young taxpayers will be funding not just oldies but also many of the immigrants.
Immigrants do have a higher employment rate than natives.
The dependency ratio is not purely about tax either. There is a need for workers to keep essential services and industries going like Social Care, agriculture, food processing and building even if these are often poorly paid.
Yep exactly. If a minimum wage carer enables a highly qualified professional to return to work (rather than care for a relative), overall output and tax take is significantly increased.
That’s why the chat about only importing “net contributors” is so weak, and even more so if you consider they are crowding out young ambitious Brits who might want a good job. Much more honest (and defendable tbh) to oppose immigration in general.
Your regular reminder that 75-80% of people in the care homes are UK nationals.
The "they can't be bothered to wipe bums" thing is untrue.
That is despite the care home owners selling a pile of visas - because nearly no-one on such a visa ended up working in a care home. Which is why the government shutdown direct recruitment from abroad.
Likely about 90% in much of the country.
Google shows how the system was abused:
Key Statistics on Care Worker Visas (2023-2025):
Peak Recruitment: In 2023, around 106,000 visas were issued for social care roles, including Health and Care Worker visas.
2024-2025 Decline: The number of visas granted to adult social care staff fell by roughly 90% in 2024 compared to 2023.
2025 Total: Only 13,286 Health and Care Worker visas were granted to main applicants throughout 2025.
2025/26 Trend: Official data shows that international recruitment of care workers has largely ended, with only 303 visas granted to overseas care staff between July and September 2025, during which the ban on overseas recruitment was implemented.
There was, apparently, a hilarious moment when a deputation of the care home owners rocked up at No.10 and demanded the scheme be reopened. The minister talking to them suggested that they could hire among the thousands of people they'd got visas for - nearly none of whom were working in the care industry.
The version of the story I heard was that the minster quoted actual numbers to individual business owners.
If true, it suggests that at least one person in this government does their homework.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
There are some posters on the site who think Rishi Sunak is a liberal lefty sell out. There are others who think Starmer is a Thatcherite clone class traitor. It is unlikely that we will all share a similar perception of whether the site skews left or right.
The idea that one side or the other sits there with hands nicely folded, when their ideas are challenged is simply wrong.
There has been some very good stuff written on how people perceive challenges to their ideas and the ideas of others - it goes to the heart of the concepts of innate bias.
We see our values as being especially challenged, and perceive the challenges to others much less. Even when the level of challenge is equal.
This is major reason why some retreat to echo chambers.
I suspect the major reason why people retreat to echo chambers is shared agreement leads to dopamine release.
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Gordon Brown texture like sun Never a frown with Gordon Brown
After watching the Reforn candidate on Question Time and seeing you can get Burnham at 1/4 and knowing it's a two horse race isn't it worth putting the farm on him?
I think not. Burnham should be favourite but it is far from a done deal yet. Notwithstanding the fact that the Reform candidate is a repulsive mysoginist creature, relatively few people watch Question Time.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
There are some posters on the site who think Rishi Sunak is a liberal lefty sell out. There are others who think Starmer is a Thatcherite clone class traitor. It is unlikely that we will all share a similar perception of whether the site skews left or right.
The idea that one side or the other sits there with hands nicely folded, when their ideas are challenged is simply wrong.
There has been some very good stuff written on how people perceive challenges to their ideas and the ideas of others - it goes to the heart of the concepts of innate bias.
We see our values as being especially challenged, and perceive the challenges to others much less. Even when the level of challenge is equal.
This is major reason why some retreat to echo chambers.
I suspect the major reason why people retreat to echo chambers is shared agreement leads to dopamine release.
Which is the flip side of the above
"Awesome to find so many people agreeing with me on the obviously Truth. Rather than all that exhausting stuff of arguing with people who worship Absolute Evil."
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
Insomnia in my case.
Where's that? Is it in the Balkans post Yugoslavia?
I watched Question Time for the first time in a couple of years last night. A brief summary. Reform have picked a duffer. Rob looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights, and his biggest weakness, more significant than his social media history, was that he just doesn't know, or understand, much at all. Burnham was just Burnham. The Tory was quite appealing - civilised, pleasant and reasonable, rather old school. The other two (Green and Lib Dem) didn't really register much, though they were both much more articulate than Rob.
I really don't understand why Reform have put up such a weak candidate (though I don't mind). The contrast between sassy Hannah the plumber in Gorton & Denton and Rob the plumber in Makerfield is huge, irrespective of their political stances.
Kenyon was the incumbent candidate fro, 2024 so I get why inertia may have carried him.
As for why him, why not? The assumption amongst many parties is that northerners are thick, so have a candidate to match. From a posh southern Reform perspective that lot don't know any better, just shout immigrants at them and they'll vote for anything.
The comedy is that last night highlighted the real choice here. If people want change there is a candidate who is articulate, passionate, creative and has a clear plan to change how stuff gets done. Or you have Mr women are slags.
Reform's vote has been sliding for a while nationally, the "tight" claim of this by-election now replaced by a 10pt Burnham lead, and I expect that to widen further.
Reform should be very happy that the Restore candidate was not allowed on Question Time she would been shown to be the sane choice.
Equally I doubt many Makerfield voters actually watched the program so the only bit that may cross over is more confirmation that the Reform candidate isn’t very bright
The saner choice of the insane choices, perhaps. Not withstanding the polls, it does feel like we are hitting peak Farage, and a combo of a recovering Kemi and the prospect of Labour stopping their hole digging shenanigans might just knock NF back a fair deal.
I am certainly not backing Farage to lead the largest party next time.
In the wider world, and maybe related, it also feels like Trump and Putin may be heading towards their last hurrah... well we can certainly hope so,
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
There are some posters on the site who think Rishi Sunak is a liberal lefty sell out. There are others who think Starmer is a Thatcherite clone class traitor. It is unlikely that we will all share a similar perception of whether the site skews left or right.
How left or right the site is now, I won't say, but I will say with certainty that it is much more (centre) left than it was a decade ago.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
Insomnia in my case.
Where's that? Is it in the Balkans post Yugoslavia?
After watching the Reforn candidate on Question Time and seeing you can get Burnham at 1/4 and knowing it's a two horse race isn't it worth putting the farm on him?
I think not. Burnham should be favourite but it is far from a done deal yet. Notwithstanding the fact that the Reform candidate is a repulsive mysoginist creature, relatively few people watch Question Time.
But the word is out.
Folk in the constituency will talk - and put the boot in.
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
Portugal.
While most of Europe was constantly redrawn by wars and empires, Portugal's border with Spain was officially set in 1297 and has stayed almost the same ever since. One of the oldest and most stable borders in the world.
After watching the Reforn candidate on Question Time and seeing you can get Burnham at 1/4 and knowing it's a two horse race isn't it worth putting the farm on him?
I think not. Burnham should be favourite but it is far from a done deal yet. Notwithstanding the fact that the Reform candidate is a repulsive mysoginist creature, relatively few people watch Question Time.
But the word is out.
Folk in the constituency will talk - and put the boot in.
If Reform can get the clip of him leaving the Green candidate speechless to go viral, then they can turn QT into a win.
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
Portugal.
While most of Europe was constantly redrawn by wars and empires, Portugal's border with Spain was officially set in 1297 and has stayed almost the same ever since. One of the oldest and most stable borders in the world.
True, but part of Spain for a while in the ?1500's.
England with 40 run lead going into a 1 innings shoot-out with a pitch getting easier to bat on? Or all wrapped up today, decided by whichever team has someone who starts swinging when one of the bowlers has a poor spell and gets a run a ball 50.
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
Portugal.
While most of Europe was constantly redrawn by wars and empires, Portugal's border with Spain was officially set in 1297 and has stayed almost the same ever since. One of the oldest and most stable borders in the world.
True, but part of Spain for a while in the ?1500's.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
Insomnia in my case.
Where's that? Is it in the Balkans post Yugoslavia?
Peter.
Didn't he used to play centre forward for Newcastle?
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
Insomnia in my case.
Where's that? Is it in the Balkans post Yugoslavia?
Peter.
Didn't he used to play centre forward for Newcastle?
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Gordon Brown texture like sun Never a frown with Gordon Brown
Was going to take up OLB's suggestion but was then reminded about the cricket. Maybe after lunch when the cricket's over...
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
France's Eastern border hasn't been very settled - gradually encroached on Germany from the 1600s onwards especially under Louis XIV and various other acquisitions during the Revolution e.g.Nice and only really settled after 1815. Then acquired Savoy later, and of course Alsace-Lorraine was in Germany 1870-1918.
So really only Spain and Portugal with fixed boundaries going back to before 1800 or so.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
There are some posters on the site who think Rishi Sunak is a liberal lefty sell out. There are others who think Starmer is a Thatcherite clone class traitor. It is unlikely that we will all share a similar perception of whether the site skews left or right.
How left or right the site is now, I won't say, but I will say with certainty that it is much more (centre) left than it was a decade ago.
Anyone who is a Brexiteer and wants to leave the ECHR is now right or far right. Pretty well accepted after some (little noticed) well targeted marketing by Labour. It's one of the principle reasons that Kemi doesn't make progress whatever her personal ratings (real or imagined)
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
France's Eastern border hasn't been very settled - gradually encroached on Germany from the 1600s onwards especially under Louis XIV and various other acquisitions during the Revolution e.g.Nice and only really settled after 1815. Then acquired Savoy later, and of course Alsace-Lorraine was in Germany 1870-1918.
So really only Spain and Portugal with fixed boundaries going back to before 1800 or so.
There are many issues that Reform could campaign on but seem to concentrate on immigration. They are often tagged as racist and may be so. Or they could be very good political operators that see an hot-button issue that will never be solved over this next generation. Local news highlighting the large drop in primary school intake (10% - 13%) compared to a decade ago. This compares to Adult Social Care and SEND eating up Local Authority budgets.
So the usual reminder that Reform and Restore don't have solutions. Or if their solutions were implemented we'd (aka the young taxpayers) be in a very difficult position in terms of supporting the domestic population. Remove immigration and the line drops significantly.
Do you realise that not all immigrants are net tax contributors ?
The young taxpayers will be funding not just oldies but also many of the immigrants.
The table shows *net* immigration. Behind that is 700K of immigration on current policies of high starting salaries i.e. net contributors. Look at Kemi's parentage. Were they here for the benefits? Or even Anushka Asthana who has been mentioned before. Were her parents here for benefits? Look at the wider picture rather than the myopic one.
Its you who is being myopic by talking about individuals.
Take a look at inner cities of Birmingham or Bradford or Dewsbury or Blackburn.
If all immigrants were net contributors then these would be among the most affluent parts of the country.
The reality is they're not and they're not.
Immigrants vary in who they are and the socioeconomic effects they have.
And believing that all immigrants are net contributors is somewhere between extreme gullibility and willfull mendacity.
"Take a look at inner cities of Birmingham or Bradford or Dewsbury or Blackburn. If all immigrants were net contributors then these would be among the most affluent parts of the country."
A risible argument, and it would be even without the added straw man you created by using "all".
My point is that some immigrants are more successful in this country than others and some immigrant communities are more successful in this country than others.
I would hope that this was by now undeniable.
And this reality needs to be taken into account when deciding immigration policy.
As opposed to the bleating of 'more immigrants needed, more immigrants needed, more immigrants needed' with little interest as to who they are.
Or the bizarre idea that low skilled immigrants might be better as they don't compete with Britons for high skilled jobs.
Woke, lefty muesli munchers like myself never asked for lots and lots of Indian Subcontinent immigration. We were happy with the Eastern Europeans that you all voted to kick out. It was this woke, lefty muesli muncher who called for Indian Subcontinent immigration.
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Gordon Brown texture like sun Never a frown with Gordon Brown
Was going to take up OLB's suggestion but was then reminded about the cricket. Maybe after lunch when the cricket's over...
I like punk. I like guitar music, I like fast guitar music. I value energy over finesse. I reckon if you lined up all the members of this board in order of how much they like punk, I would be in the top handful. I also quite like punk's less talented offshoot, Oi. And yet, I will admit that 90% of punk isn't very good. You don't need to be the best musician in the world to produce something interesting, but you do need a spark of creativity. If you have 1000 albums in your collection, one of them really needs to be Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols. It is genuinely one of the best albums of all time. That was basically all they did though. London Calling by the Clash is a fine album, but is it punk? Probably not, by that stage. And also you need something by the Buzzcocks. Beyond that I'd say it all gets a bit optional. But it was a very brief movement. 1976-1978 at the longest. Almost everything after mid-1978 was either New Wave or Oi.
(Mind you, New Wave could keep you going for a lifetime.)
I watched Question Time for the first time in a couple of years last night. A brief summary. Reform have picked a duffer. Rob looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights, and his biggest weakness, more significant than his social media history, was that he just doesn't know, or understand, much at all. Burnham was just Burnham. The Tory was quite appealing - civilised, pleasant and reasonable, rather old school. The other two (Green and Lib Dem) didn't really register much, though they were both much more articulate than Rob.
I really don't understand why Reform have put up such a weak candidate (though I don't mind). The contrast between sassy Hannah the plumber in Gorton & Denton and Rob the plumber in Makerfield is huge, irrespective of their political stances.
Kenyon was the incumbent candidate fro, 2024 so I get why inertia may have carried him.
As for why him, why not? The assumption amongst many parties is that northerners are thick, so have a candidate to match. From a posh southern Reform perspective that lot don't know any better, just shout immigrants at them and they'll vote for anything.
The comedy is that last night highlighted the real choice here. If people want change there is a candidate who is articulate, passionate, creative and has a clear plan to change how stuff gets done. Or you have Mr women are slags.
Reform's vote has been sliding for a while nationally, the "tight" claim of this by-election now replaced by a 10pt Burnham lead, and I expect that to widen further.
Reform should be very happy that the Restore candidate was not allowed on Question Time she would been shown to be the sane choice.
Equally I doubt many Makerfield voters actually watched the program so the only bit that may cross over is more confirmation that the Reform candidate isn’t very bright
The saner choice of the insane choices, perhaps. Not withstanding the polls, it does feel like we are hitting peak Farage, and a combo of a recovering Kemi and the prospect of Labour stopping their hole digging shenanigans might just knock NF back a fair deal.
I am certainly not backing Farage to lead the largest party next time.
In the wider world, and maybe related, it also feels like Trump and Putin may be heading towards their last hurrah... well we can certainly hope so,
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
There are some posters on the site who think Rishi Sunak is a liberal lefty sell out. There are others who think Starmer is a Thatcherite clone class traitor. It is unlikely that we will all share a similar perception of whether the site skews left or right.
How left or right the site is now, I won't say, but I will say with certainty that it is much more (centre) left than it was a decade ago.
Well that's me, isn't it. I've hauled it left by sheer force of personality.
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Gordon Brown texture like sun Never a frown with Gordon Brown
Was going to take up OLB's suggestion but was then reminded about the cricket. Maybe after lunch when the cricket's over...
I like punk. I like guitar music, I like fast guitar music. I value energy over finesse. I reckon if you lined up all the members of this board in order of how much they like punk, I would be in the top handful. I also quite like punk's less talented offshoot, Oi. And yet, I will admit that 90% of punk isn't very good. You don't need to be the best musician in the world to produce something interesting, but you do need a spark of creativity. If you have 1000 albums in your collection, one of them really needs to be Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols. It is genuinely one of the best albums of all time. That was basically all they did though. London Calling by the Clash is a fine album, but is it punk? Probably not, by that stage. And also you need something by the Buzzcocks. Beyond that I'd say it all gets a bit optional. But it was a very brief movement. 1976-1978 at the longest. Almost everything after mid-1978 was either New Wave or Oi.
(Mind you, New Wave could keep you going for a lifetime.)
Ever Fallen in Love (With Someone You Shouldn't've) is quite possibly one of the finest "pop" songs ever written.
I remember Peter Shelley at Malvern Winter Gardens pleading with the punks to "stop spitting".
A place I am pretty familiar with... I must say that the trend is not the friend for the SNP here, there must be a decent chance that Lumsden could just snatch it. Reform are not strong in the City, and the trend for the SNP in the North East over the past two cycles has been weaker.
Not enough data of course, there never is, but a cheeky punt on the Tories for this maverick constituency could prove to be the value bet.
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
If you put Monmouthshire aside and consider Wales as a separate country retrospectively, England has had the same borders since Northumberland joined in (I think) the 1100's. But "England" hasn't been a sovereign nation state since 1706.
If you display nothing but the coastline and borders in Europe since the Dark Ages/post-Rome and run them forward, it's amazing how much they change. Any dramatisation of Henry VIII always gabbles quickly past the origin of Anne of Cleves, since Germany didn't exist at the time.
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Gordon Brown texture like sun Never a frown with Gordon Brown
Was going to take up OLB's suggestion but was then reminded about the cricket. Maybe after lunch when the cricket's over...
I like punk. I like guitar music, I like fast guitar music. I value energy over finesse. I reckon if you lined up all the members of this board in order of how much they like punk, I would be in the top handful. I also quite like punk's less talented offshoot, Oi. And yet, I will admit that 90% of punk isn't very good. You don't need to be the best musician in the world to produce something interesting, but you do need a spark of creativity. If you have 1000 albums in your collection, one of them really needs to be Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols. It is genuinely one of the best albums of all time. That was basically all they did though. London Calling by the Clash is a fine album, but is it punk? Probably not, by that stage. And also you need something by the Buzzcocks. Beyond that I'd say it all gets a bit optional. But it was a very brief movement. 1976-1978 at the longest. Almost everything after mid-1978 was either New Wave or Oi.
(Mind you, New Wave could keep you going for a lifetime.)
Ever Fallen in Love (With Someone You Shouldn't've) is quite possibly one of the finest "pop" songs ever written.
I remember Peter Shelley at Malvern Winter Gardens pleading with the punks to "stop spitting".
Suzanne Moore writing in the Guardian, when she uaed to work for it, had some good lines on this.
Something along the lines, I remember : ".. You read endless mythology on what a wonderful.time it was. What I remembet is going to.a lot of gigs where the atmosphere was full of anger and aggression, and people throwing biotttles and telling everyone to fuck off."
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
If you put Monmouthshire aside and consider Wales as a separate country retrospectively, England has had the same borders since Northumberland joined in (I think) the 1100's. But "England" hasn't been a sovereign nation state since 1706.
If you display nothing but the coastline and borders in Europe since the Dark Ages/post-Rome and run them forward, it's amazing how much they change. Any dramatisation of Henry VIII always gabbles quickly past the origin of Anne of Cleves, since Germany didn't exist at the time.
The changes are particularly noticeable in the East.
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Gordon Brown texture like sun Never a frown with Gordon Brown
Was going to take up OLB's suggestion but was then reminded about the cricket. Maybe after lunch when the cricket's over...
I like punk. I like guitar music, I like fast guitar music. I value energy over finesse. I reckon if you lined up all the members of this board in order of how much they like punk, I would be in the top handful. I also quite like punk's less talented offshoot, Oi. And yet, I will admit that 90% of punk isn't very good. You don't need to be the best musician in the world to produce something interesting, but you do need a spark of creativity. If you have 1000 albums in your collection, one of them really needs to be Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols. It is genuinely one of the best albums of all time. That was basically all they did though. London Calling by the Clash is a fine album, but is it punk? Probably not, by that stage. And also you need something by the Buzzcocks. Beyond that I'd say it all gets a bit optional. But it was a very brief movement. 1976-1978 at the longest. Almost everything after mid-1978 was either New Wave or Oi.
(Mind you, New Wave could keep you going for a lifetime.)
Ever Fallen in Love (With Someone You Shouldn't've) is quite possibly one of the finest "pop" songs ever written.
I remember Peter Shelley at Malvern Winter Gardens pleading with the punks to "stop spitting".
The Stranglers at Durham Uni in 1979 were very pissed off with all the gobbing.
"It's not fucking 1977, man..."
Still love "Let's Submerge" by X Ray Spex. Punk with saxophone - winner!
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Gordon Brown texture like sun Never a frown with Gordon Brown
Was going to take up OLB's suggestion but was then reminded about the cricket. Maybe after lunch when the cricket's over...
I like punk. I like guitar music, I like fast guitar music. I value energy over finesse. I reckon if you lined up all the members of this board in order of how much they like punk, I would be in the top handful. I also quite like punk's less talented offshoot, Oi. And yet, I will admit that 90% of punk isn't very good. You don't need to be the best musician in the world to produce something interesting, but you do need a spark of creativity. If you have 1000 albums in your collection, one of them really needs to be Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols. It is genuinely one of the best albums of all time. That was basically all they did though. London Calling by the Clash is a fine album, but is it punk? Probably not, by that stage. And also you need something by the Buzzcocks. Beyond that I'd say it all gets a bit optional. But it was a very brief movement. 1976-1978 at the longest. Almost everything after mid-1978 was either New Wave or Oi.
(Mind you, New Wave could keep you going for a lifetime.)
Ever Fallen in Love (With Someone You Shouldn't've) is quite possibly one of the finest "pop" songs ever written.
I remember Peter Shelley at Malvern Winter Gardens pleading with the punks to "stop spitting".
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
There are some posters on the site who think Rishi Sunak is a liberal lefty sell out. There are others who think Starmer is a Thatcherite clone class traitor. It is unlikely that we will all share a similar perception of whether the site skews left or right.
The idea that one side or the other sits there with hands nicely folded, when their ideas are challenged is simply wrong.
There has been some very good stuff written on how people perceive challenges to their ideas and the ideas of others - it goes to the heart of the concepts of innate bias.
We see our values as being especially challenged, and perceive the challenges to others much less. Even when the level of challenge is equal.
This is major reason why some retreat to echo chambers.
I suspect the major reason why people retreat to echo chambers is shared agreement leads to dopamine release.
It must be a pretty great feeling. I wish I could experience it.
For years, social media has felt to me like being trapped in 'somebody elses echo chamber'. Which is horrible.
Interestingly (or Not!) as someone who really only recently started posting this is what I have noticed.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
There are some posters on the site who think Rishi Sunak is a liberal lefty sell out. There are others who think Starmer is a Thatcherite clone class traitor. It is unlikely that we will all share a similar perception of whether the site skews left or right.
The idea that one side or the other sits there with hands nicely folded, when their ideas are challenged is simply wrong.
There has been some very good stuff written on how people perceive challenges to their ideas and the ideas of others - it goes to the heart of the concepts of innate bias.
We see our values as being especially challenged, and perceive the challenges to others much less. Even when the level of challenge is equal.
This is major reason why some retreat to echo chambers.
I suspect the major reason why people retreat to echo chambers is shared agreement leads to dopamine release.
It must be a pretty great feeling. I wish I could experience it.
For years, social media has felt to me like being trapped in 'somebody elses echo chamber'. Which is horrible.
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
Portugal.
While most of Europe was constantly redrawn by wars and empires, Portugal's border with Spain was officially set in 1297 and has stayed almost the same ever since. One of the oldest and most stable borders in the world.
Although for quite a long time, it wan't an international border, almost all the border between Lithuania and Latvia has been the same since around 1260. The last/first town in Latvia on the E67 is Grenctale- Latvian for the German Grenztal- border valley.
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Gordon Brown texture like sun Never a frown with Gordon Brown
Was going to take up OLB's suggestion but was then reminded about the cricket. Maybe after lunch when the cricket's over...
I like punk. I like guitar music, I like fast guitar music. I value energy over finesse. I reckon if you lined up all the members of this board in order of how much they like punk, I would be in the top handful. I also quite like punk's less talented offshoot, Oi. And yet, I will admit that 90% of punk isn't very good. You don't need to be the best musician in the world to produce something interesting, but you do need a spark of creativity. If you have 1000 albums in your collection, one of them really needs to be Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols. It is genuinely one of the best albums of all time. That was basically all they did though. London Calling by the Clash is a fine album, but is it punk? Probably not, by that stage. And also you need something by the Buzzcocks. Beyond that I'd say it all gets a bit optional. But it was a very brief movement. 1976-1978 at the longest. Almost everything after mid-1978 was either New Wave or Oi.
(Mind you, New Wave could keep you going for a lifetime.)
Ever Fallen in Love (With Someone You Shouldn't've) is quite possibly one of the finest "pop" songs ever written.
I remember Peter Shelley at Malvern Winter Gardens pleading with the punks to "stop spitting".
What about Teenage Kicks by the Undertones?
That's often advanced as being the perfect pop song. For which 'short' is a key metric. The perfect pop song can't be more than 2 mins 30 secs.
A fascinating article about the lost world of rock that got blown away by punk. I can't stand punk music personally, except for the more new wave stuff that is sometimes bundled up with it, like the Stranglers or Blondie. Call me old fashioned, but I like songs with a tune. I don't really like the gobby attitude associated with it either. I turned 1 in 1976 so I was a bit young for it all anyway.
People also conveniently forget Punk rocks flirtation with the Far rights and Nazi symbolism.
A very seedy underbelly to punk.
Although, nice tunes.
Yeah I was trying to keep this politics free but very much agree on the far right aspect, another reason why I don't care for punk much, apart from the paucity of tunes and the spitting.
I didn’t care for the spitting either. Vile habit.
Music wise I quite liked some of the stuff, probably more new wave. I like guitar based music.
I could listen to the Stranglers all day.
Gordon Brown texture like sun Never a frown with Gordon Brown
Was going to take up OLB's suggestion but was then reminded about the cricket. Maybe after lunch when the cricket's over...
I like punk. I like guitar music, I like fast guitar music. I value energy over finesse. I reckon if you lined up all the members of this board in order of how much they like punk, I would be in the top handful. I also quite like punk's less talented offshoot, Oi. And yet, I will admit that 90% of punk isn't very good. You don't need to be the best musician in the world to produce something interesting, but you do need a spark of creativity. If you have 1000 albums in your collection, one of them really needs to be Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols. It is genuinely one of the best albums of all time. That was basically all they did though. London Calling by the Clash is a fine album, but is it punk? Probably not, by that stage. And also you need something by the Buzzcocks. Beyond that I'd say it all gets a bit optional. But it was a very brief movement. 1976-1978 at the longest. Almost everything after mid-1978 was either New Wave or Oi.
(Mind you, New Wave could keep you going for a lifetime.)
Ever Fallen in Love (With Someone You Shouldn't've) is quite possibly one of the finest "pop" songs ever written.
I remember Peter Shelley at Malvern Winter Gardens pleading with the punks to "stop spitting".
What about Teenage Kicks by the Undertones?
That's often advanced as being the perfect pop song. For which 'short' is a key metric. The perfect pop song can't be more than 2 mins 30 secs.
Exc: Kemi Badenoch has told me that conflict over identity politics in the UK could lead to a potential civil war in the long term.
She’s not wrong. We’re sliding into Northern Ireland-esque sectarianism and I doubt even Burnham can hold back the tide. I find it interesting that it seems one of the biggest issues in Israeli politics other than the obvious is that internal division fuelled by social media and the like is seen as one of the biggest threats to the state of Israel’s long term future. Nations cannot survive long if they are divided fundamentally.
The Wars of the Roses, the Civil War etc suggest that's not a universal truth.
It's actually nonsense. Nations are particularly enduring and cohesive...
Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, UK (1801-1922ish), Austria-Hungary, Prussia, Ruthenia, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Serbia and Montenegro. And that's just the ones I could quickly think of in Europe.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
France and Spain are about the only European states relatively unchanged since about 1600 . And Spain has the advantage of geography.
Portugal.
While most of Europe was constantly redrawn by wars and empires, Portugal's border with Spain was officially set in 1297 and has stayed almost the same ever since. One of the oldest and most stable borders in the world.
True, but part of Spain for a while in the ?1500's.
I spent half a day doorknocking in Makerfield last Sunday, in two different locations. There were some favourable responses for Burnham who had good name recognition and was personally known to a couple of people I met, but there were quite a few Reform and hostile against responses too. We did quite a bit of driving across about 5 miles of the constituency and in that time and during doorknocking I spotted about 20 homes with Reform stakes/posters compared with about 10 for Labour and 1 Restore, although I don't think you can take too much heed of the relative numbers for Reform v Labour (based on an appreciation that if willingness to display a poster was a reliable indicator of relative support, the Conservatives wouldn't have won a general election in my lifetime.) What was striking was just how many people were not aware of the national implications if Burnham won and the Labour campaign approach was not to mention that. That approach might change a bit now that Burnham has made clear his intentions. A couple of Reform supporters appeared to genuinely equivocate once I went off script and pointed out that if Burnham wins Starmer would probably be out of the door in months.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite.
A real election result from tonight. (Figures from the VoteUK forum).
"Westmorland & Furness: Hawcoat & New Barn
Reform gain from Conservative, with change since 2022 in brackets
Reform 1,139 (48.4%/new) Labour 576 (24.5%/-10.9%) Conservative 447 (19%/-22.9%) Green 121 (5.1%/new) Liberal democrat 69 (2.9%/-2.9%)"
Kemis new Con Army in meltdown
Reform and Restore to it's Right and no one believing it's current Leadership is anything but Right Wing Tory.
She can wear pale Blue, sky Blue , light Blue, the Tories will only be considered credible, relevant , electable wen they find a new Leader who is a genuine mature centre right Politician
I think keeping Kemi is probably the Tories best option, not so much because she is good, more that all the alternatives are even worse.
In a political environment where both Reform and Restore are campaigning as overtly racist, voters are not going to switch to a right wing party led by a Black woman.
If they like that racially divisive politics they will vote Reform/Restore, if they loathe it they will vote Lab/LD/Green/SNP/PC.
Her best chance is to get completely away from the Culture War Social Media stuff and concentrate on bread and butter issues that matter to the voters such as the economy, taxation and education.
Oh I am bookmarking this absolutely awful political prediction post by you Foxy, its utterly on another level when it comes to the left leaning chauvinistic male view of politics on this site!! I just have no words other than I am not surprised this site now has a real cross party women contribution problem when it comes to reading pig ignorant patronising posts like this!!
Seriously did you even engage your brain or read back your comment before posting it?! More importantly, did you even bother to recognise the current rising personal polling of that incredible politically talented and charismatic black woman leading the Conservative party right now who is currently taking on both the far right and left flank of UK politics to take control of the central ground in British politics by good old honest talking sense?!
If it were so, why are the Tories languishing on 17%, down 7% from the GE?
(Also: "left leaning chauvinistic male view of politics on this site" - Left leaning?? Sure, there are a few of us on here who are left of centre but we're easily outnumbered by those on the right. Which is fine - I hope PB never becomes the sole preserve of the left or the right.)
Where are the regular cross party female posters on this site these days?!...
@Beibheirli_C posts sporadically but not often. @CarlottaVance has not posted for some time. @Cyclefree continues to write articles and post posts, but is more often followed on Twitter. MattWardman on Bluesky has a Political Betting starter pack, on which many PBers past and present may be found. https://bsky.app/profile/mattwardman.bsky.social
After watching the Reforn candidate on Question Time and seeing you can get Burnham at 1/4 and knowing it's a two horse race isn't it worth putting the farm on him?
Don't see anything about ability in that article, just comments about who she may or may not 'rattle'. She won a beauty parade against a very, very ugly personality.
Comments
https://www.ons.gov.uk/census/maps/choropleth/population/country-of-birth/country-of-birth-3a/born-outside-the-uk
I see Aberdeen south is causing some debate on here, allow me to wade in. The odds on a Tory gain here have dropped a fair bit since they came out, Tories down to 7/4 on some bookies. I'd say this is about right, SNP are still favs, but only marginal given the way things have been going for them the last fortnight.
Foxy is right on the stats, Scots Cons did lose more than half their seats and roughly half their % vote at last months election, but their vote held up a lot better in Aberdeenshire (including Aberdeen Deeside and North Kincardine, the new name for the seat equivalent to Aberdeen South), getting more than 30% of the vote. Stephen Flynn only got back in by 1,244 votes. The real Tory massacre was on the list.
There's a lot of anxiety in Aberdeen area re the future direction of the oil industry and a lot of mud being slung around the political scene, it'll be a tighter contest than initially expected.
It'll come down to whether enough Reform voters hold their nose and tactically vote Tory to kick out the SNP. As in by elections, they aren't often 3 way contests and I'd expect Labour to tail off. Tories should be no worse than 2nd, they'll beat Reform, but SNP still favs. Lab at 40/1 is a fantastic bet if anyone thinks they'll improve on their 2024 vote share (I don't, they took a pasting last month in Scotland).
Although they only won by 859 votes over Labour in 2024, Arbroath and Broughty Ferry should be a shoo in for the SNP. Lab vote is well down on then, and that's before the Reform surge is factored in. Lab currently around 7/1 here.
The SNP have a more experienced candidate in Aberdeen South, had it been the other way round I'd say they'd be in more trouble. I expect it'll still be another rough 10 days ahead for John Swinney so it's worth factoring that in too
They have around 120 staff.
So it all depends on the quality of the staff and the management.
A risible argument, and it would be even without the added straw man you created by using "all".
The "they can't be bothered to wipe bums" thing is untrue.
That is despite the care home owners selling a pile of visas - because nearly no-one on such a visa ended up working in a care home. Which is why the government shutdown direct recruitment from abroad.
Yes Badenoch has been there. If you don't even know that, not sure how you can speak with such confidence. Conservatives are working this very hard. SNP seem distracted for some reason, suspect a lot of there vote will stay at home. Labour barely appear to be trying. Reform, who knows.
2/1 is good value. Had been 15/8, drifted to 5/2, now back to 2/1 (7/4 at many places). Would imagine that the Conservatives will be disappointed if they don't get this.
On Arbroath, would expect an SNP hold, which would be massively disappointing for Labour. They should not be 8/1 in a seat they lost by only 859 votes in 2024. Reform seem the value at 20/1, but I really can't see them doing it.
Makerfield - this survey feels about right to me (but what may I know). I would be concerned though that the most popular politician in the entire party, in a by-election, in an area they have never lost, in a place he has 'connections' to and is the local mayor....is only 10% in the lead.
Burnham's problems will be his mid-term blues will be at general election time. His honeymoon will be well and truly over, unless he calls a GE. In which he will be very unpopular for calling an unnecessary GE.
On the scale of a human life, most nations endure. But on the scale of centuries, they don't. Germany and Italy as unified states are less than 200 years old, and United Germany's borders are (ahem) famously fluid.
Most of us here are habitual voters for one party or another, which biases us to think the same of most (normal) people who don't think about politics seriously most of the time. But even here we sometimes agree with someone unexpected, which makes the site so much more interesting than if it was a daily clash between ultra-partisans.
I've excluded Nigel as he appears to be no more than a media tart with a side line in grift. The 'true believers' will still be there as they are in the US but whether the skill base and commitment is there, is still unproven. The Makerfield candidate suggests Yusuf still has a long way to go.
https://www.linkedin.com/company/reform-uk/about/
They are currently advertising about a dozen positions on one jobs site.
(Edited)
Seriously committed to it, gobbing and all.
Most of us thought punk was shit, but we respected the commitment.
I would hope that this was by now undeniable.
And this reality needs to be taken into account when deciding immigration policy.
As opposed to the bleating of 'more immigrants needed, more immigrants needed, more immigrants needed' with little interest as to who they are.
Or the bizarre idea that low skilled immigrants might be better as they don't compete with Britons for high skilled jobs.
He's been gaga for a while now.
I don't really see a left wing bias but I do see people on the right being more prejorative and strident and getting more upset when their arguments are challenged. It's a bit like the Farage thing, they make a bold statement then complain about their others when someone has the ordacity to challenge it.
I find few on the far left, so i'd say this site is centre left, but only because it lacks people on the hard left and hasn't enough on the centre right.
My judgement so far is that those on the right who post are more to the right than those on the left,which is probably why they fair badly in many debates, they put up more dogmantic arguements and those usually lose.
It's a general tendency in debates whether you are left or right, the more committed you are the more you suffer from confirmation bias and the weaker your arguments become because your perspective narrows.
As to gender I have no idea who is male or female nor want to know.
Nor do I know what race,creed, nationality or class people are unless I read it or they bring other up.
I post under my own name and it can be easlily looked up and as for everyone who doesn't you regagless of what you claim, you could be anyone, including a Bot.
But I have noticed this;
Posts drop off rapidly after midnight and dry up usually about 1.00 am but start again at an oddly early 5.00 am which suggests a lot of people who post here go to bed earlier than me and get up ridiculously early or they don't actually live in the UK.
Nothing wrong with being in another Country but a slightly odd mix for people commenting on largely UK issues.
Peter.
https://x.com/wesstreeting/status/2062821149218623948
With politics in such a state of flux, it's also an argument for keeping campaigning simple. With tribal loyalties much diminished there is a greater case for blanket leafleting of every home rather than (at significantly extra cost) target hand-delivered mailshots at maybe one in four homes on the false assumption that these are going to be the only swing voters. In what are increasingly multi-party contests, the latter targeted approach also diminishes your visibility and thus makes it harder to claim that your own party is in contention.
Peter.
Google shows how the system was abused:
Key Statistics on Care Worker Visas (2023-2025):
Peak Recruitment: In 2023, around 106,000 visas were issued for social care roles, including Health and Care Worker visas.
2024-2025 Decline: The number of visas granted to adult social care staff fell by roughly 90% in 2024 compared to 2023.
2025 Total: Only 13,286 Health and Care Worker visas were granted to main applicants throughout 2025.
2025/26 Trend: Official data shows that international recruitment of care workers has largely ended, with only 303 visas granted to overseas care staff between July and September 2025, during which the ban on overseas recruitment was implemented.
There has been some very good stuff written on how people perceive challenges to their ideas and the ideas of others - it goes to the heart of the concepts of innate bias.
We see our values as being especially challenged, and perceive the challenges to others much less. Even when the level of challenge is equal.
This is major reason why some retreat to echo chambers.
On Burnham, if he gets in, and takes over the UK Labour party, I wouldn't expect him to call and early election. I don't think he would, electorate way too volatile right now.
Almost forgot the Greens are standing in Aberdeen South. They stood in relatively few constituencies in May, so the SNP have their own 'Reform' to contend with this time
But mostly, because it makes me feel fine about eating steak.
"Your ass is grass, and I'm the lawnmower."
Trainer and course content - entirely forgotten.
Slogan - firmly affixed.
The version of the story I heard was that the minster quoted actual numbers to individual business owners.
If true, it suggests that at least one person in this government does their homework.
Never a frown with Gordon Brown
"Awesome to find so many people agreeing with me on the obviously Truth. Rather than all that exhausting stuff of arguing with people who worship Absolute Evil."
"As long as the roots are not severed, all is well. And all will be well in the garden."
NZ 65-7
Folk in the constituency will talk - and put the boot in.
While most of Europe was constantly redrawn by wars and empires, Portugal's border with Spain was officially set in 1297 and has stayed almost the same ever since. One of the oldest and most stable borders in the world.
Amazing how it's lasted so long.
Or all wrapped up today, decided by whichever team has someone who starts swinging when one of the bowlers has a poor spell and gets a run a ball 50.
82 for 8.
Maybe after lunch when the cricket's over...
https://www.pollcheck.co.uk/by-elections/aberdeen-south
Peter.
So really only Spain and Portugal with fixed boundaries going back to before 1800 or so.
EDIT - And Switzerland of course
100 up.
We have the UK Treasury inspired future for the Red Arrows.
The .. er .. Red Barrows.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/videos/cnvpdez5rz7o
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/04/19/boris-johnson-will-not-publicly-lecture-india-ukraine-chases/
And yet, I will admit that 90% of punk isn't very good. You don't need to be the best musician in the world to produce something interesting, but you do need a spark of creativity.
If you have 1000 albums in your collection, one of them really needs to be Never Mind the Bollocks Here's the Sex Pistols. It is genuinely one of the best albums of all time. That was basically all they did though. London Calling by the Clash is a fine album, but is it punk? Probably not, by that stage. And also you need something by the Buzzcocks. Beyond that I'd say it all gets a bit optional.
But it was a very brief movement. 1976-1978 at the longest. Almost everything after mid-1978 was either New Wave or Oi.
(Mind you, New Wave could keep you going for a lifetime.)
I remember Peter Shelley at Malvern Winter Gardens pleading with the punks to "stop spitting".
Not enough data of course, there never is, but a cheeky punt on the Tories for this maverick constituency could prove to be the value bet.
If you display nothing but the coastline and borders in Europe since the Dark Ages/post-Rome and run them forward, it's amazing how much they change. Any dramatisation of Henry VIII always gabbles quickly past the origin of Anne of Cleves, since Germany didn't exist at the time.
Something along the lines, I remember : ".. You read endless mythology on what a wonderful.time it was. What I remembet is going to.a lot of gigs where the atmosphere was full of anger and aggression, and people throwing biotttles and telling everyone to fuck off."
NEW THREAD
"It's not fucking 1977, man..."
Still love "Let's Submerge" by X Ray Spex. Punk with saxophone - winner!
For years, social media has felt to me like being trapped in 'somebody elses echo chamber'. Which is horrible.
That's often advanced as being the perfect pop song. For which 'short' is a key metric. The perfect pop song can't be more than 2 mins 30 secs.
Great pop song and for me better than teh original.
Peter.
The overall impression was that it certainly wasn't in the bag for Burnham so I would counsel against going all in on Burnham based on the latest Survation polling. With a lot still in play I don't find odds of 2/9 on attractive although Burnham should still be favourite.