I don't mind the debate too much but it's disingenuous unless those taking part accept there's no perfect electoral system, all have their pros and cons and most have the capacity to spit out wonky outcomes. Plus really you can't just unpick the electoral method for the Commons alone without zooming out and looking at the wider constitutional picture including the Lords, whether we need/want a constituency link, how the different nations that make up the UK are represented and even into things like the layout of the current Commons chamber, which hardly supports more flexible groupings.
All things they didn't demand of the previous Conservative government(s). The scale of the grift from these chancers is remarkable.
https://x.com/mrjamesob/status/1820056123547799982 NB from MacKenzie's wiki "...Despite apologising on a number of platforms, in 2016, MacKenzie made a joke in The Sun newspaper that if it was true that George Osborne (the then Chancellor of the Exchequer) was putting gongs up for sale, he should be made Lord MacKenzie of Anfield (Liverpool FC's home stadium).[68] A day before the 28th anniversary of the Hillsborough disaster in April 2017, MacKenzie's column in The Sun mentioned the Everton footballer Ross Barkley appearing to imply Barkley deserved to be beaten up in a nightclub incident earlier in the week. Comparing the player to a "gorilla at the zoo", MacKenzie was accused of racism (Barkley is of part-Nigerian descent). The column was removed from the newspaper's website on the afternoon of its day of publication.[69][70] Later in the day, a spokesman for the newspaper apologised "for the offence caused" and said the columnist "has been suspended from the paper with immediate effect. The views expressed by Kelvin Mackenzie about the people of Liverpool were wrong, unfunny and are not the view of the paper".[71] A month after the column appeared, it was announced that MacKenzie's "contract with News Group Newspapers", the Sun's publishers, "has been terminated by mutual consent".[1] In response to MacKenzie's article, on the day of its publication Everton FC banned The Sun and its reporters "from all areas of its operation"[72] following Liverpool FC who had made such a decision about The Sun in February 2017.[73]"
They’ve lost the Telegraph! A media that has encouraged division, stoked suspicion of “others” and told people that foreigners and foreign institutions are the reason for all their problems are suddenly confronted with the consequences of their words… The hypocrisy is breathtaking.
Blimey. I was so stunned by the first line of the Telegraph’s headline I missed the significance of the third line. As the cliche goes… “there used to be a newspaper over there.”
While the Times and Telegraph continue to fan the flames of the insurrection, one strange outcome is that The Sun has decided to join the community of the sane.
I’m ever so slightly cynical that the Mail and Sun are just employing this tactic to wind their readers up more, and fan the flames of the two tier policing nonsense.
I’m cynical that they have realised they badly overstepped in brewing this up over a decade. The point of their usual it’s pc gawn mad, immigrant obsessions is not to bring the Country to its knees in a fascist insurrection but to keep a Government in power that is friendly to their owners, which doesn’t regulate or bring in workers’ rights i.e. keeps things as they are. They don’t need this, know the readership will be unhappy and that it’s bad for business.
The Sun’s new found sense of moderation has also allowed it to aim both barrels at JK Rowling, author of detestable upper class fantasies Harry Potter. This on the Olympic row.
I think that's pretty much it. It's all fun and games until someone lobs a brick at a copper. Ultimately, most people don't want civil strife. That's exactly why no one with a healthy brain thinks there is going to be a civil war in the UK.
A lot of both sidism language. For example, people attacking a mosque described as ‘anti-mosque protestors’ as if that is a thing. It may be waking up though. It’s not actually an exclusive as I read reports on social media yesterday about it but it’s important it is known about.
Not the UK media but this is the CEO of Twitter absolutely losing her marbles. https://x.com/YourAnonNews/status/1820859446148694419 Sorry, guys and gals, if corporations don't want to advertise on your platform that's their choice. Even if they all get together and decide not to advertise on your platform that's up to them. Not much fun playing 'Capitalism' when you can't set all the rules is it!
Worth noting that this isn't coming from her. It's coming from Musk. She's nothing more than a puppet. Doesn't make lawsuit any less frivolous, of course. Related note, anyone remember this? https://www.politico.eu/article/go-...sk-x-twitter-hits-out-at-fleeing-advertisers/ That aged well. Xhitter is clearly in financial trouble. There's no other reason to take on such an incendiary, frivolous lawsuit.
The Express somehow believes Nigel Farage is the right person to hear from as Britain faces one of its most difficult days since WW2. Absolutely contemptible shower.
Britain’s most barking join forces to complain that the new dementia drug is not available on the NHS. In its haste to attack the NHS the Express appears to be channelling Socialist Worker. But they have the wrong end of the stick here. At £40k per patient this drug, that would be required by 100s of thousands, only slows the course of the disease by months, even weeks. When calculating the benefit of spending within the NHS, clearing the backlog of operations across all ages in preference is a no-brainer. The real significance of this drug is that it could be the first of many. The NHS needs to prepare for that. But considering the Express has expended so much energy in supporting a Party hostile to the NHS, that underfunded it over more than a decade and always supports the shrinking of the State, surely it can answer the question on behalf of its wealthy owners itself?
Why has this IT tycoon chap's yacht sinking been headline news? Yes, it's rotten luck and, yes it's terribly sad etc etc, but come on, is it that important? I don't think I'd even heard of the bloke until a couple of weeks ago
More shouty nonsense from these newspapers. I read part of the issue isn't just cost, but also that the side effects are notable and anyone on it would need fortnightly hospital appointments to check their progress. It's not sustainable really on any front. But, as you say, it offers a lot of optimism for the future that R&D in this field is starting to pay off.
Odd that the advocates of the unfettered free market and the benefits of private healthcare are asking for the taxpayer to cover the full cost. Surely, according to their thinking, people should be prepared and happy to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds for their own treatment.
The Mail and Express views on funding of the NHS have nothing to do with party politics? I would say they have everything to do with that. I suspect it is not a view these papers would have frontpaged during the last administration, even if the motivation (to keep elderly p!ss on the boil) remains. They would not have done so because they and their Party advocate a small state. They do so now to undermine confidence in Labour’s running of the NHS. The ultimate goal remains, privatisation.
No, the NICE recommendation has nothing to do with party politics and it is misleading to portray it as such. I´m agreeing with you! (I think).
Of course but these papers are not going to lead on that aspect of the story. Otherwise the headline (somewhere around P7) would be Non Departmental Body of The Department of Health and Social Care makes carefully balanced decision rather than ‘fury.’
