Reposted by JT
I just think what this is missing is that income tax is going up under Labour and people already feel that a bit and will feel it more by the next election.
Labour's 'not touching, can't get mad' approach to raising income tax can't work, won't work, is part of why they've lost trust.
Labour's 'not touching, can't get mad' approach to raising income tax can't work, won't work, is part of why they've lost trust.
Too much analysis was still treating breaking the tax pledge as “just another unpopular decision” rather than recognising consequence of breaking a promise which defined an election for the public. If is correct the govt won’t now break it they may have avoided a deeply scarring loss of public trust
November 14, 2025 at 10:49 AM
I just think what this is missing is that income tax is going up under Labour and people already feel that a bit and will feel it more by the next election.
Labour's 'not touching, can't get mad' approach to raising income tax can't work, won't work, is part of why they've lost trust.
Labour's 'not touching, can't get mad' approach to raising income tax can't work, won't work, is part of why they've lost trust.
Reposted by JT
By "the left" Goodwin could more accurately say that it is "84-95% of the white British" who reject Goodwin's drift into ethnonationalism
November 14, 2025 at 1:07 AM
By "the left" Goodwin could more accurately say that it is "84-95% of the white British" who reject Goodwin's drift into ethnonationalism
Reposted by JT
Also, maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t. A lot of Labour voters clearly *felt* that Labour had let them down by bailing out the banks but it would have been even more devastating not to. The job is to govern.
Come on! It was not central or definitional to the 2024 election.
Too much analysis was still treating breaking the tax pledge as “just another unpopular decision” rather than recognising consequence of breaking a promise which defined an election for the public. If is correct the govt won’t now break it they may have avoided a deeply scarring loss of public trust
November 14, 2025 at 9:53 AM
Also, maybe it was, maybe it wasn’t. A lot of Labour voters clearly *felt* that Labour had let them down by bailing out the banks but it would have been even more devastating not to. The job is to govern.
More than anything, the Labour government being relatively unrecognisable to the Tory one in its style due to a managerial, visionless approach is bad for our democracy as people will look for more extreme options to actually see what they perceive as meaningful change.
November 14, 2025 at 9:48 AM
More than anything, the Labour government being relatively unrecognisable to the Tory one in its style due to a managerial, visionless approach is bad for our democracy as people will look for more extreme options to actually see what they perceive as meaningful change.
Reposted by JT
parts of Bluesky think the Starmer Govt is bad because they're Actually Right-Wing or Too Centrist or whatever and this is fundamentally wrong because the thing is, they would be much better if they were any of those things, or indeed Left-Wing, or anything coherent, rather than *fucking useless*
November 13, 2025 at 10:50 PM
parts of Bluesky think the Starmer Govt is bad because they're Actually Right-Wing or Too Centrist or whatever and this is fundamentally wrong because the thing is, they would be much better if they were any of those things, or indeed Left-Wing, or anything coherent, rather than *fucking useless*
Reposted by JT
A stark contrast between London Labour & Oxfordshire LibDems (pro charging drivers more to tackle congestion) and London LibDems and Oxfordshire Labour (against additional charges).
Which party is in favour of which travel schemes is so often a postcode lottery.
Which party is in favour of which travel schemes is so often a postcode lottery.
From 2 January 2026, London's daily Congestion Charge will jump from £15 to £18. TfL says it's necessary to tackle increasing traffic.
Electric vehicles will be affected too, though with a 50 per cent discount for electric vans, HGVs and quadricycles and a 25 per cent discount for electric cars.
Electric vehicles will be affected too, though with a 50 per cent discount for electric vans, HGVs and quadricycles and a 25 per cent discount for electric cars.
November 13, 2025 at 8:49 PM
A stark contrast between London Labour & Oxfordshire LibDems (pro charging drivers more to tackle congestion) and London LibDems and Oxfordshire Labour (against additional charges).
Which party is in favour of which travel schemes is so often a postcode lottery.
Which party is in favour of which travel schemes is so often a postcode lottery.
Reposted by JT
Anyway: both the state and private developers need to build at far greater rates, the default aim should be 'a dual earner couple on average incomes can live in non-crowded conditions and raise a family', and the model family *for policymakers* should be three for obvious reasons.
November 13, 2025 at 3:58 PM
Anyway: both the state and private developers need to build at far greater rates, the default aim should be 'a dual earner couple on average incomes can live in non-crowded conditions and raise a family', and the model family *for policymakers* should be three for obvious reasons.
The cycle to work scheme genuinely improved my health and wellbeing to the point that I can almost guarantee the savings on me not having to use the NHS probably outway the £500 or so discount I got, so who can say if it's good or not.
The clever thing about going for stuff like the cycle for work scheme is it’s really noticeable, affects people with lots of media access and platforms, annoys green groups, and raises almost no revenue at the same time. Real win/win/win there.
November 13, 2025 at 10:11 AM
The cycle to work scheme genuinely improved my health and wellbeing to the point that I can almost guarantee the savings on me not having to use the NHS probably outway the £500 or so discount I got, so who can say if it's good or not.
Reposted by JT
It’s very enervating to watch intelligent and educated people play dumb about this amidst the ascendance of a far-right reactionary movement driven by antisocial Silicon Valley psychos and Miami crypto scammers who all treat women as status symbols on the same level as NFTs and Labubus.
he’s a provider of access to money, connections and beautiful women and girls — everything that these people need to affirm their own status. being rich and powerful is a grift which requires other to bolster & buy in. That’s the service Epstein provided.
Something that’s so striking in these emails is how…unimpressive Epstein is. He comes off as a pompous, sub-literate lech. Yes everyone is so mortifyingly solicitous of him! All fawning and flattery! Why?????
November 13, 2025 at 9:15 AM
It’s very enervating to watch intelligent and educated people play dumb about this amidst the ascendance of a far-right reactionary movement driven by antisocial Silicon Valley psychos and Miami crypto scammers who all treat women as status symbols on the same level as NFTs and Labubus.
Reposted by JT
Media standards:
1) No Democratic scandal on par with Trump-Epstein, so it’d be biased and unfair to five it much attention.
2) Trump wouldn’t be shamed into resigning and his cult of personality wouldn’t abandon him, so Trump-Epstein wasn’t worth pursuing.
Way too many think that’s journalism.
1) No Democratic scandal on par with Trump-Epstein, so it’d be biased and unfair to five it much attention.
2) Trump wouldn’t be shamed into resigning and his cult of personality wouldn’t abandon him, so Trump-Epstein wasn’t worth pursuing.
Way too many think that’s journalism.
November 13, 2025 at 12:35 AM
Media standards:
1) No Democratic scandal on par with Trump-Epstein, so it’d be biased and unfair to five it much attention.
2) Trump wouldn’t be shamed into resigning and his cult of personality wouldn’t abandon him, so Trump-Epstein wasn’t worth pursuing.
Way too many think that’s journalism.
1) No Democratic scandal on par with Trump-Epstein, so it’d be biased and unfair to five it much attention.
2) Trump wouldn’t be shamed into resigning and his cult of personality wouldn’t abandon him, so Trump-Epstein wasn’t worth pursuing.
Way too many think that’s journalism.
Reposted by JT
Again, if you wanted to confirm in people's minds that you're running a conspiracy to keep damning evidence about you hidden, this is pretty much exactly what you'd be doing
Rep. Lauren Boebert says that there is “NO WAY” she will take her name off the Epstein files discharge petition.
President Trump and his administration are pressuring her to remove her name.
Via Manu Raju
President Trump and his administration are pressuring her to remove her name.
Via Manu Raju
November 12, 2025 at 9:25 PM
Again, if you wanted to confirm in people's minds that you're running a conspiracy to keep damning evidence about you hidden, this is pretty much exactly what you'd be doing
Reposted by JT
Can we circle back to the part where the NY Times never disclosed that they have incriminating information on Donald Trump from sent by Epstein that's been sitting on their email servers for nearly a decade?
Stuff like this makes me wonder why there hasn't been any reporting about Trump having affairs during his presidencies
November 12, 2025 at 7:15 PM
Can we circle back to the part where the NY Times never disclosed that they have incriminating information on Donald Trump from sent by Epstein that's been sitting on their email servers for nearly a decade?
Reposted by JT
My radical view is that the story about the president being implicated in a notorious paedophile ring should be covered as an important story *in its own right*, and then secondarily any political consequences can be covered later
November 12, 2025 at 4:14 PM
My radical view is that the story about the president being implicated in a notorious paedophile ring should be covered as an important story *in its own right*, and then secondarily any political consequences can be covered later
Reposted by JT
Trump ‘spent hours’ at Epstein’s house with victim of sex trafficking, email alleges on.ft.com/49lfk4N
Trump ‘spent hours’ at Epstein’s house with victim of sex trafficking, email alleges
House Democrats release new communications from late paedophile
on.ft.com
November 12, 2025 at 2:04 PM
Trump ‘spent hours’ at Epstein’s house with victim of sex trafficking, email alleges on.ft.com/49lfk4N
Reposted by JT
i mean c’mon. the president’s best friend was the most notorious pedo in the country’s history who ran a massive child trafficking ring. every bit of circumstantial evidence we have says that trump was a participant. if this were a criminal trial we’d have enough evidence to compel a plea deal.
November 12, 2025 at 2:49 PM
i mean c’mon. the president’s best friend was the most notorious pedo in the country’s history who ran a massive child trafficking ring. every bit of circumstantial evidence we have says that trump was a participant. if this were a criminal trial we’d have enough evidence to compel a plea deal.
I don't think a better example of a government flailing with no guiding principles could be given.
November 12, 2025 at 9:09 AM
I don't think a better example of a government flailing with no guiding principles could be given.
Reposted by JT
can't think of a headline that better sums up the BBC at present
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpo...
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpo...
BBC slammed for asking Kelvin Mackenzie about journalism standards
Liverpool fans and others staggered by choice to invite former S*n editor to discuss ongoing issues at the BBC
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk
November 11, 2025 at 9:13 AM
can't think of a headline that better sums up the BBC at present
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpo...
www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpo...
Reposted by JT
the fun thing about the BBC story is that I can't actually read about it for more than couple of minutes at a time because it makes me feel too insane :)
The worst you can accuse Panorama of doing is making a misleading edit – and I’d dispute that! – to make *a point that was true*.
The programme aired without anyone seeing any issues with the edit. It was on iPlayer for a year without complaints. Donald Trump *did* incite Jan 6th.
The programme aired without anyone seeing any issues with the edit. It was on iPlayer for a year without complaints. Donald Trump *did* incite Jan 6th.
Tory culture spox demanding the BBC "grovel" to Trump is baffling. Who is this supposed to chime with?
Just a bizarre line that no one who doesn't use X would ever think.
Just a bizarre line that no one who doesn't use X would ever think.
November 11, 2025 at 9:53 AM
the fun thing about the BBC story is that I can't actually read about it for more than couple of minutes at a time because it makes me feel too insane :)
Reposted by JT
I do not understand the Labour government's reticence over defending the BBC and social media regulation. Their long-term survival basically depends on it. Their cowardice in the face of it may be the single thing they are most remembered for.
on.ft.com/3JVxC1Z via @FT
on.ft.com/3JVxC1Z via @FT
BBC faces ‘existential’ threat after exit of top executives
Broadcaster’s deepest crisis in recent history comes amid fresh questions over its future role in British society
on.ft.com
November 11, 2025 at 7:35 AM
I do not understand the Labour government's reticence over defending the BBC and social media regulation. Their long-term survival basically depends on it. Their cowardice in the face of it may be the single thing they are most remembered for.
on.ft.com/3JVxC1Z via @FT
on.ft.com/3JVxC1Z via @FT
Reposted by JT
IMO the worst thing about this government is its failure to see Trump, Farage, anti-immigration rhetoric, rising racism, and the 'gender critical' lobby as connected elements of a global war against liberalism and social democracy – and instead treating them as discrete issues to be 'managed'.
November 11, 2025 at 9:30 AM
IMO the worst thing about this government is its failure to see Trump, Farage, anti-immigration rhetoric, rising racism, and the 'gender critical' lobby as connected elements of a global war against liberalism and social democracy – and instead treating them as discrete issues to be 'managed'.
I feel like I'm going mad. This list of issues that Prescott highlighted appears, to me, to be completely alien to reality? Like, taking a step back, who would argue the BBC is pro-trans, pro-Gaza, or even not *pushing* enough migration stories???
Reads entirely like his own list of hobby horses?
Reads entirely like his own list of hobby horses?
November 11, 2025 at 9:58 AM
I feel like I'm going mad. This list of issues that Prescott highlighted appears, to me, to be completely alien to reality? Like, taking a step back, who would argue the BBC is pro-trans, pro-Gaza, or even not *pushing* enough migration stories???
Reads entirely like his own list of hobby horses?
Reads entirely like his own list of hobby horses?
Reposted by JT
“whatever club he’s invited to join has been devalued by the invitation”
November 11, 2025 at 3:05 AM
“whatever club he’s invited to join has been devalued by the invitation”
Reposted by JT
there's a moment in PARADISE LOST where Satan arrives in Eden and realizes Hell isn't a place; it's a thing he carries within him and it'll follow him wherever he goes. and i think about that when i see these awful rich men whose monstrous wealth has enriched them not at all
“whatever club he’s invited to join has been devalued by the invitation”
November 11, 2025 at 6:31 AM
there's a moment in PARADISE LOST where Satan arrives in Eden and realizes Hell isn't a place; it's a thing he carries within him and it'll follow him wherever he goes. and i think about that when i see these awful rich men whose monstrous wealth has enriched them not at all
Reposted by JT
What's fascinating here is that as she rhymes off the list of gender critical people at Newsnight pursuing an explicitly gender critical agenda, in the context of a discussion of ideological capture at the BBC, she doesn't recognise that she was part of the ideological capture of the BBC by GCs.
Emily Maitlis admitting she worked at the bbc to try and get healthcare for trans people shut down
November 11, 2025 at 7:52 AM
What's fascinating here is that as she rhymes off the list of gender critical people at Newsnight pursuing an explicitly gender critical agenda, in the context of a discussion of ideological capture at the BBC, she doesn't recognise that she was part of the ideological capture of the BBC by GCs.
Reposted by JT
Objectivity, impartiality and balance are all *different things*, and the lazy tendency to treat them as synonyms, and to use partisan balance alone as a proxy for the others, is the root cause of a vast amount of nonsense.
Robbie Gibb once suggested that reporters should reflect if they were getting more retweets from one side than the other - a braindead analysis that ignores that fair and impartial reporting of education might get more Tory retweets than say, criminal justice.
Stephen really does have the best take on this. It’s not clear that the BBC Board or indeed the rest of the News team really understood the message of the previous reviews, which were about getting detail right. Instead they wanted to know what was ‘biased’ or not like they were blotting out stains.
November 10, 2025 at 10:54 AM
Objectivity, impartiality and balance are all *different things*, and the lazy tendency to treat them as synonyms, and to use partisan balance alone as a proxy for the others, is the root cause of a vast amount of nonsense.