What’s funny is that Barbie’s humour flew over the heads of most of the teens in the cinema we went to.
Our group of five were laughing like drains and getting funny looks from kids who missed the jokes completely.
Starting with the opening scene, which I was thinking looked familiar but didn't click for some time that it was Spoiler:
2001
I think it was unironically a good film, though it did try to have its cake and eat it with the reaction to consumerism.
A bit like fox showing the Simpsons
Re: Starmer
Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2023 3:51 pm
by headshot
“Read my lips: No. New. Taxes.”
Pfft.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Sun Aug 27, 2023 11:14 pm
by Millennie Al
I think that means we won't get any nude axes.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Fri Oct 06, 2023 9:51 am
by Woodchopper
Massive Labour win in Rutherglen and Hamilton West. SNP down by 16.6 percentage points, the Tory vote down to a total of 3.9%.
Obviously there are caveats with a by-election but if Labour can win back lots of seats from the SNP then the prospect of a workable majority in Westminster look much more likely.
Massive Labour win in Rutherglen and Hamilton West. SNP down by 16.6 percentage points, the Tory vote down to a total of 3.9%.
Obviously there are caveats with a by-election but if Labour can win back lots of seats from the SNP then the prospect of a workable majority in Westminster look much more likely.
From a Scotland perspective this seems to be fairly obviously a backlash against the SNP than anything Labour have particularly done to win Scottish voters round. The SNP are going to be in trouble for a long time of course but it'll be interesting to see how this develops. Personally, I really hope the fact that the SNP seem to be dead in the water for the time being at least means Scottish Labour will focus on things other than bashing them.
It also probably doesn't bode all that well for the Scottish Greens either, I imagine. I mean, they have messed up a bit on policy recently but I don't really want to see them losing absolutely all of the ground they've gained recently.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Sat Oct 07, 2023 11:50 am
by lpm
There seems to be more and more evidence that "don't interrupt your opponent when they're making a mistake" is a good approach.
I think that was the Survation poll for Greenpeace that also broke down voting intention by primary source of news.
Only the Mail and GB News had less than 1 point lead for Labour
It was 12 points for Express readers
Re: Starmer
Posted: Tue Oct 10, 2023 8:29 pm
by monkey
Starmer had fun at conference:
Kevin Maguire of the Mirror and New Statesman wrote:"If he thinks that bothers me he doesn't know me," says a cool Starmer with glitter on his shirt and jacked off.
Huge majorities overturned in Tamworth and Mid Bedfordshire. There seems to be some disagreement as to whether the latter was the largest ever, or just since 1945.
Mid Bedfordshire was held by the Tories continuously for 92 years. I don’t know what the record is there but I doubt there could have been many more safer seats.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2023 9:22 am
by El Pollo Diablo
It was interesting going canvassing around Mid-Beds (I was in Cranfield) the other week - obviously no one there was as pissed off as me about HS2, but there were several local pressures which speak to national issues. One of the big ones, which affects my constituency as well, is that they're building shitloads of houses, but all of the associated infrastructure which was promised - health centres, schools, bus routes - has been removed from the plans. And whilst that's made through local decisions, it's because of national funding. It was one of the five pledges on Strathern's leaflets.
Another one of his pledges (let's not pretend he has any ability to actually do anything about them, but writing them down and then getting voted in suggests at least some alignment with what constituents are concerned about) was about more GPs and better access to health care. Again, round here, and where you are as well, people are finding it near impossible to get a GP's appointment. When they do, and they get referred, they wait ages for that appointment. I had a GP appointment in July, and am now waiting until next July to get it seen to. We had an interesting chat with a lady who works as a receptionist in a GP surgery. Her daughter is training to be a nurse, and has just agreed to move to Tasmania once her training is complete. So whilst she was rightly concerned about the state of the NHS in the wake of that, she was also rightly challenging about how stupidly hard it will be to turn all that around. But she was still minded to vote Labour.
Lastly, the Tories' claims that "very few people changed their votes" isn't true. The "comfortable middle", if you like, the ones who don't pay much attention and just want good schools for their kids and an easy drive to the station and so on, they're pissed off. They want to vote against the Tories. Plenty can't be arsed in a by-election, even one where they were getting bombarded for weeks on end, but if the Tories tell themselves that their 2019 voters are just staying at home rather than voting against, they're f.cked. I spoke to enough people on the doorstep who would have fallen in the Boris camp four years ago but who just want them out now.
It was interesting going canvassing around Mid-Beds (I was in Cranfield) the other week - obviously no one there was as pissed off as me about HS2, but there were several local pressures which speak to national issues. One of the big ones, which affects my constituency as well, is that they're building shitloads of houses, but all of the associated infrastructure which was promised - health centres, schools, bus routes - has been removed from the plans. And whilst that's made through local decisions, it's because of national funding. It was one of the five pledges on Strathern's leaflets.
Another one of his pledges (let's not pretend he has any ability to actually do anything about them, but writing them down and then getting voted in suggests at least some alignment with what constituents are concerned about) was about more GPs and better access to health care. Again, round here, and where you are as well, people are finding it near impossible to get a GP's appointment. When they do, and they get referred, they wait ages for that appointment. I had a GP appointment in July, and am now waiting until next July to get it seen to. We had an interesting chat with a lady who works as a receptionist in a GP surgery. Her daughter is training to be a nurse, and has just agreed to move to Tasmania once her training is complete. So whilst she was rightly concerned about the state of the NHS in the wake of that, she was also rightly challenging about how stupidly hard it will be to turn all that around. But she was still minded to vote Labour.
Lastly, the Tories' claims that "very few people changed their votes" isn't true. The "comfortable middle", if you like, the ones who don't pay much attention and just want good schools for their kids and an easy drive to the station and so on, they're pissed off. They want to vote against the Tories. Plenty can't be arsed in a by-election, even one where they were getting bombarded for weeks on end, but if the Tories tell themselves that their 2019 voters are just staying at home rather than voting against, they're f.cked. I spoke to enough people on the doorstep who would have fallen in the Boris camp four years ago but who just want them out now.
I'm torn.
Half of me wants them to completely panic and lose all discipline, as well as give up completely.
Half of me wants them to convince themselves that it's just normal "mid term blues" and to continue along their current trajectory.
I have a slight preference for the first one
Re: Starmer
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2023 9:47 am
by headshot
All I want them to do is call a GE before January 2025.
Mid Bedfordshire was held by the Tories continuously for 92 years. I don’t know what the record is there but I doubt there could have been many more safer seats.
This, presumably, was what Mad Nad wanted. Though she was probably a bit disappointed it turned out that there was another by-election the same day to dilute the news impact.
Though the truth is, no one cares a toss about Mad Nad any more. Vanished into the dustbin of obscurity.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2023 9:51 am
by El Pollo Diablo
For me the danger point comes after the next election. Starmer will inevitably not be able to change the UK's fortunes very quickly, and some jadedness will result. The Tories will move to the right, possibly further than the Iain & Duncan Smith days, and I do just wonder if the election after might be a fight for our lives. Might be another 2001, mind, where Labour win easily but turnout is very low.
It was interesting going canvassing around Mid-Beds (I was in Cranfield) the other week - obviously no one there was as pissed off as me about HS2, but there were several local pressures which speak to national issues. One of the big ones, which affects my constituency as well, is that they're building shitloads of houses, but all of the associated infrastructure which was promised - health centres, schools, bus routes - has been removed from the plans. And whilst that's made through local decisions, it's because of national funding. It was one of the five pledges on Strathern's leaflets.
Another one of his pledges (let's not pretend he has any ability to actually do anything about them, but writing them down and then getting voted in suggests at least some alignment with what constituents are concerned about) was about more GPs and better access to health care. Again, round here, and where you are as well, people are finding it near impossible to get a GP's appointment. When they do, and they get referred, they wait ages for that appointment. I had a GP appointment in July, and am now waiting until next July to get it seen to. We had an interesting chat with a lady who works as a receptionist in a GP surgery. Her daughter is training to be a nurse, and has just agreed to move to Tasmania once her training is complete. So whilst she was rightly concerned about the state of the NHS in the wake of that, she was also rightly challenging about how stupidly hard it will be to turn all that around. But she was still minded to vote Labour.
Lastly, the Tories' claims that "very few people changed their votes" isn't true. The "comfortable middle", if you like, the ones who don't pay much attention and just want good schools for their kids and an easy drive to the station and so on, they're pissed off. They want to vote against the Tories. Plenty can't be arsed in a by-election, even one where they were getting bombarded for weeks on end, but if the Tories tell themselves that their 2019 voters are just staying at home rather than voting against, they're f.cked. I spoke to enough people on the doorstep who would have fallen in the Boris camp four years ago but who just want them out now.
See new posts
Conversation
Beth Rigby
@BethRigby
·
2h
MP texts: Says quote below is what some 2019-ers are saying on MP whatsapps groups, and that they are “deluded”
‘Our voters stayed at home they DIDN'T switch. Come the General the public who sat in their hands will come out to back us.’
Shane Levitt
@ShaneLevitt11
Isn’t it generally younger people who don’t vote in by-elections? If that’s the case thank god the Tories are polling well with the young…..
All I want them to do is call a GE before January 2025.
There's near zero chance they'll go earlier than Dec or Jan.
I think comedy is the best to hope for in the next year and a bit.
I think it's a bit higher than that, maybe 10%
My reasoning:
A lot of the MPs will be realising that losing the parliamentary party whip won't negatively impact their political career, so they might decide to try to push their ideologies and influence the choice of next leader and the party direction after the election. So they might start putting in letters to the 1922 Committee.
And if that happens, could Sunak brazen it out of he wins a leadership vote but with numbers that would mean a majority of MPs have no confidence in him?
Even if he'd still have a plurality of MPs.
It'd be a fiasco with Labour pointing out that say 40 Tory MPs don't want him to lead the party but still apparently want him to lead the country.
Re: Starmer
Posted: Fri Oct 20, 2023 10:16 am
by El Pollo Diablo
I just wonder if they'll go for May because of the local elections tbh. And because all the old people will be dead by December next year. But obviously that's magical thinking.
Huge majorities overturned in Tamworth and Mid Bedfordshire. There seems to be some disagreement as to whether the latter was the largest ever, or just since 1945.
Mid Bedfordshire was held by the Tories continuously for 92 years. I don’t know what the record is there but I doubt there could have been many more safer seats.
Mrs Snooze and I were a bit too busy to canvas in Mid-Beds, but we go door-knocking in our own constituency most weeks. One of the more common remarks I hear on the doorstep is that there is no hope of winning where we are, because the constituency has been Tory for the last 70 years. In reality it is now a perfectly winnable seat and, if I frequented bookmakers establishnments, I would guess that they would have us as favourites to win. I am hoping that Mid-Beds might do something to change that perception.
Another one of his pledges (let's not pretend he has any ability to actually do anything about them, but writing them down and then getting voted in suggests at least some alignment with what constituents are concerned about) was about more GPs and better access to health care. Again, round here, and where you are as well, people are finding it near impossible to get a GP's appointment.
It's the same in our constituency, and particularly in my ward, where the Labour councillor has been trying to get us our own GP Surgery for years and years with no success. As you say, it's a lot easier to promise than to deliver.
The pledge that slightly grinds my gears is the one on crime. We seem to have decided to revive the "Tough on Crime" message and the last of Kier's mission statements promises an increase in sentences for rape, and new "Respect" orders to deal with anti-social behaviour (sometimes they get described as "ASBOs with teeth). It's difficult to question this without seeming to be in favour of anti-social behaviour and rape. But ... sentences for most offences have been increasing for years. It doesn't seem to do much good and, if Labour looked to criminologists to inform its policies rather than the Daily Mail, they would realise that you wouldn't expect it to do much good. What would do some good, and would not be difficult to do, would be to reduce the ridiculous amount of time that elapses between a charge being made and the case coming to court. Perhaps Labour might manage to do that, but it's not something they are highlighting in their leaflets. And as for the Respect orders - ASBOs don't seem to have been much of a policy success and I am not sure that giving them "teeth" will do much more than increase the pressure on prisons.
That said, I understand why Labour has to sound tough on crime. Antisocial behaviour is one of the things I often find mentioned when I go out canvassing so I just hand over the "5 Missions" leaflet, stick to the party line, and suppress my misgivings. It would be nice if political parties could have more thoughtful and evidence-based discussions about criminal justice though.
I just wonder if they'll go for May because of the local elections tbh. And because all the old people will be dead by December next year. But obviously that's magical thinking.
They may have to go for an election sooner if they want to be sure that they will be HM's loyal opposition.
With the kind of swings in yesterday's by-election, there's a risk of them being the third biggest party, and so having no official role at all.
I just wonder if they'll go for May because of the local elections tbh. And because all the old people will be dead by December next year. But obviously that's magical thinking.
They may have to go for an election sooner if they want to be sure that they will be HM's loyal opposition.
With the kind of swings in yesterday's by-election, there's a risk of them being the third biggest party, and so having no official role at all.
The implicit assumption behind that is Tory MPs and leaders wanting to do what's best for the party, instead of what's best for their bank balance.
I just wonder if they'll go for May because of the local elections tbh. And because all the old people will be dead by December next year. But obviously that's magical thinking.
They may have to go for an election sooner if they want to be sure that they will be HM's loyal opposition.
With the kind of swings in yesterday's by-election, there's a risk of them being the third biggest party, and so having no official role at all.
The implicit assumption behind that is Tory MPs and leaders wanting to do what's best for the party, instead of what's best for their bank balance.
Doesn't seem a plausible assumption.
They'll want their salaries till Jan 2025.
Sure, but what post-election prospects do they have if the Tories aren't the official opposition? Trading on their connections to the next Tory government is harder if they are the third party.
Mid Bedfordshire was held by the Tories continuously for 92 years. I don’t know what the record is there but I doubt there could have been many more safer seats.
33rd safest Conservative seat in the country, according to a post I saw.
eta: Which continued to suggest: right now is a great window of opportunity to persuade Sunak to rush through proportional representation, in order to limit their losses
