What's hilarious about this Trump book is that even with all of the disasters described in it, Hilary still lost to Don. What an awful candidate she was.
The important thing for policy to drive change in behaviour is that the alternative is cheaper and more convenient than the behaviour you want to change. If the alternative is convenient for everyone it doesn't matter what cost you impose on the deprecated behaviour. But if it is inconvenient you get a doublewhammy: the behaviour stays the same and consumers resent the arbitrary charge, as they see it. The key to this policy is to make non-disposable cups easy. Maybe cafes need to provide taps next to the sugar and milk dispensers so customers can rinse their personal cups.
The 5p charge for carrier bags was chosen because that's the average cost of a bag to retailers.
The key thing for cappuccini is that you can taste the coffee. It should be coffee with milk and not the other way round.
It's working with diesel cars.
California has completely banned supermarket carrier bags, which would channel the mind somewhat. I am so absent minded I never remember to bring a bag to the shops, so just pay the charge, which is inconsequential – you could pay it every single day and amass the princely tax of £18 a year, the cost of a middling round in the pub. It is so pitiful a charge I am surprised it has had any effect – yet it would seem that it has!
No bags is a complete PITA in California. They give you cheap paper ones which break in the car park
I can imagine – but the complete cold-turkey solution is the only way to change the behaviour of sieve brains like me, however. 5p per bag? Pah!
I should imagine anyone lecturing people about "global warming" in the north and east of America right now would get short shrift...
Yes I'm aware clime and weather are different... But I don't think people in Europe realize just how extraordinarily cold it's been over the past few days in the US east and mid-west and there does come a point when the cold temperatures become so extreme and severe that you have to wonder how this is being achieved if we've had like decades and decades of AGW?.
Because it used to happen much more frequently. What is now viewed as 'extreme' was at one time a normal winter cold snap.
Case in point. The hills at the back of my house are white today but it is sleety rain on us and 2-3 degrees. 10-15 years ago we may well have been snowed in. And I might have missed my cappuccino (with chocolate sprinkles). Great stuff this global warming.
On that now free rapist, surely the problem is concurrent sentencing. It's literally a buy one get loads free licence to committing crime. If he committed over 100 crimes then he should serve over 100 sentences, life no parole or 100 consecutive 10 year sentences, that would keep him locked up for good.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
52:48. Who are the freaks?
When you take the entire worldview of Tory members as a whole - well....
The Death penalty still had a sizeable amount of support - but on issues like gay marriage....
Perhaps the trouble is that the views do pose an issue for the demographics the Tory party needs to attract - particularly those in their thirties and forties, who moved more towards Labour last time out. Somehow I doubt the views such as disliking gay marriage, and believing that everything is all fine with the current economic settlement are going to win them over.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Well, it proves that Conservative members hold Conservative opinions.
What's hilarious about this Trump book is that even with all of the disasters described in it, Hilary still lost to Don. What an awful candidate she was.
She was a poor candidate, but the media didn't help with their mithering on about 'emails' as if that transgression was in any way proportionate to Trump being certifiable.
Mr. Eagles, that's one of my favourite episodes, but I think Money (in which Blackadder has to pay back the Black Bank of Saint Herod) might be the best.
There's a very nice tribute to that episode in Guy Gavriel Kay's latest novel, Children of Earth and Sky.
I should imagine anyone lecturing people about "global warming" in the north and east of America right now would get short shrift...
Yes I'm aware clime and weather are different... But I don't think people in Europe realize just how extraordinarily cold it's been over the past few days in the US east and mid-west and there does come a point when the cold temperatures become so extreme and severe that you have to wonder how this is being achieved if we've had like decades and decades of AGW?.
Because it used to happen much more frequently. What is now viewed as 'extreme' was at one time a normal winter cold snap.
Case in point. The hills at the back of my house are white today but it is sleety rain on us and 2-3 degrees. 10-15 years ago we may well have been snowed in. And I might have missed my cappuccino (with chocolate sprinkles). Great stuff this global warming.
Frankly, why on earth would anyone have a cappuccino _without_ chocolate sprinkles? They are the entire point of the drink.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Well, it proves that Conservative members hold Conservative opinions.
On that now free rapist, surely the problem is concurrent sentencing. It's literally a buy one get loads free licence to committing crime. If he committed over 100 crimes then he should serve over 100 sentences, life no parole or 100 consecutive 10 year sentences, that would keep him locked up for good.
He's not free quite yet. There was a very good interview with the North West Chief Prosecutor on R5 this morning. He dealt with Stewart Hall. Once convicted the first time he got evidence of more crimes and prosecuted him again resulting in a longer sentence. The speculation was that the DPP had his eye taken off the ball by the indeterminate sentence and the expectation that the rapist would spend far longer than the 8 years in jail. But the prosecutor, Nazir Azfal, made the point he could be prosecuted now. And he should be. He seemed a remarkably sensible chap by the way.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Well, it proves that Conservative members hold Conservative opinions.
Yeah, and it tells us a bit more than that.
It also tells us that members of left wing parties have left wing opinions.
I should imagine anyone lecturing people about "global warming" in the north and east of America right now would get short shrift...
Yes I'm aware clime and weather are different... But I don't think people in Europe realize just how extraordinarily cold it's been over the past few days in the US east and mid-west and there does come a point when the cold temperatures become so extreme and severe that you have to wonder how this is being achieved if we've had like decades and decades of AGW?.
Because it used to happen much more frequently. What is now viewed as 'extreme' was at one time a normal winter cold snap.
Case in point. The hills at the back of my house are white today but it is sleety rain on us and 2-3 degrees. 10-15 years ago we may well have been snowed in. And I might have missed my cappuccino (with chocolate sprinkles). Great stuff this global warming.
Frankly, why on earth would anyone have a cappuccino _without_ chocolate sprinkles? They are the entire point of the drink.
You'd be better directing that question to @Cyclefree. Its an abomination, apparently.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Well, it proves that Conservative members hold Conservative opinions.
Yeah, and it tells us a bit more than that.
It also tells us that members of left wing parties have left wing opinions.
I'm actually surprised that people are shocked that members of the right wing party have right wing views and members of left wing parties have left wing views.
I should imagine anyone lecturing people about "global warming" in the north and east of America right now would get short shrift...
Yes I'm aware clime and weather are different... But I don't think people in Europe realize just how extraordinarily cold it's been over the past few days in the US east and mid-west and there does come a point when the cold temperatures become so extreme and severe that you have to wonder how this is being achieved if we've had like decades and decades of AGW?.
Because it used to happen much more frequently. What is now viewed as 'extreme' was at one time a normal winter cold snap.
Case in point. The hills at the back of my house are white today but it is sleety rain on us and 2-3 degrees. 10-15 years ago we may well have been snowed in. And I might have missed my cappuccino (with chocolate sprinkles). Great stuff this global warming.
Frankly, why on earth would anyone have a cappuccino _without_ chocolate sprinkles? They are the entire point of the drink.
You'd be better directing that question to @Cyclefree. Its an abomination, apparently.
What's hilarious about this Trump book is that even with all of the disasters described in it, Hilary still lost to Don. What an awful candidate she was.
She was a poor candidate, but the media didn't help with their mithering on about 'emails' as if that transgression was in any way proportionate to Trump being certifiable.
And the fact that she was a lying bitch who you could not believe about anything? It was a very poor choice. I would probably have voted for her given the alternative but I would have needed a shower afterwards.
Mr. L, not only that, Clinton was The Establishment candidate at the moment when The Establishment was least trusted, and was strategically inept. She could've easily won by the simple method of not insulting half the electorate whilst simultaneously throwing resources at safe California rather than at swing states.
Like a man considering sex with a vacuum cleaner, an unhappy end was all too likely.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Well, it proves that Conservative members hold Conservative opinions.
Yeah, and it tells us a bit more than that.
It also tells us that members of left wing parties have left wing opinions.
I'm actually surprised that people are shocked that members of the right wing party have right wing views and members of left wing parties have left wing views.
I think I could have told them that, without the need for research.
It’s not just a matter of coffee etiquette. It’s that it tastes disgusting. All these adults paying ludicrous prices for what is, essentially, Ovaltine.
De gustibus, etc. Down with taste fascists! If I want to eat pizza with pineapple or cappuccino a la Costa, why shouldn't I? (Yes I know you were joking - but some people take this stuff seriously...)
What's the etiquette about coffee with pineapple? *ducks*
Mind you, having said I'm skeptical about AGW I do think it's sensible to de-carbonize... And it's something that will happen anyway through technological advance.
But it needs to happen sensibly... Governments forcing it through taxation so we reach a level where only the very rich can afford to heat their mansions in the winter while the old and poor are left to freeze doesn't help things.
To me, it was always sensible to push the line "It seems there is evidence that the Earth's climate is warming. We don't have enough data points to know if this is largely man-made, an entirely natural cycle over which we have no control (there have been recent Ice Ages and warmings for which we were clearly not responsible) - or a combination. We don't even know if the data shows a short-term blip that will self-correct, or a remorseless trend.
HOWEVER, to protect its future generations (and the planet's biodiversity) humanity should take the safety-first approach. We should move towards practical steps that could reduce elements of man-made warming, wherever we can. And urgently."
Perhaps more controversially, I would suggest that climate-change denial has been a reactive response to those who are saying with religious fervour that there is no doubt at all that climate change is man-made. Neither is a helpful response to getting everybody on board to manage a significant threat.
Quite - the green zealots are the problem, not the deniers. It seems that a bunch of radicals want to force the rest of the world rapidly to deal with the issue. As usual a large section of the population have reacted against that by wanting to go slower and/or resist the zealotry involved. Simple human nature.
As history has shown time and again, one must never let the zealots get their way, too much human suffering has been caused by zealots of all creeds.
So even if they are right, the green lobby must not be believed wholesale (hence healthy scepticism) and the blind pursuit of their aims that certain governments have fallen for has resulted in gross stupidity like OTT subsidies for windfarms.
Mr. L, not only that, Clinton was The Establishment candidate at the moment when The Establishment was least trusted, and was strategically inept. She could've easily won by the simple method of not insulting half the electorate whilst simultaneously throwing resources at safe California rather than at swing states.
Like a man considering sex with a vacuum cleaner, an unhappy end was all too likely.
An interesting choice of simile. Not based on personal experience I trust?
Mind you, having said I'm skeptical about AGW I do think it's sensible to de-carbonize... And it's something that will happen anyway through technological advance.
But it needs to happen sensibly... Governments forcing it through taxation so we reach a level where only the very rich can afford to heat their mansions in the winter while the old and poor are left to freeze doesn't help things.
To me, it was always sensible to push the line "It seems there is evidence that the Earth's climate is warming. We don't have enough data points to know if this is largely man-made, an entirely natural cycle over which we have no control (there have been recent Ice Ages and warmings for which we were clearly not responsible) - or a combination. We don't even know if the data shows a short-term blip that will self-correct, or a remorseless trend.
HOWEVER, to protect its future generations (and the planet's biodiversity) humanity should take the safety-first approach. We should move towards practical steps that could reduce elements of man-made warming, wherever we can. And urgently."
Perhaps more controversially, I would suggest that climate-change denial has been a reactive response to those who are saying with religious fervour that there is no doubt at all that climate change is man-made. Neither is a helpful response to getting everybody on board to manage a significant threat.
Quite - the green zealots are the problem, not the deniers. It seems that a bunch of radicals want to force the rest of the world rapidly to deal with the issue. As usual a large section of the population have reacted against that by wanting to go slower and/or resist the zealotry involved. Simple human nature.
As history has shown time and again, one must never let the zealots get their way, too much human suffering has been caused by zealots of all creeds.
So even if they are right, the green lobby must not be believed wholesale (hence healthy scepticism) and the blind pursuit of their aims that certain governments have fallen for has resulted in gross stupidity like OTT subsidies for windfarms.
""It seems there is evidence that the Earth's climate is warming. We don't have enough data points to know if this is largely man-made, an entirely natural cycle over which we have no control (there have been recent Ice Ages and warmings for which we were clearly not responsible) - or a combination. We don't even know if the data shows a short-term blip that will self-correct, or a remorseless trend."
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
Mr. Foxy, it's a combination of being in government and not being fashionable. Social media bubbles overall favour the bleeding heart left over the fiscally dry right.
Not literal nepotism, but he was appointed by Jo Johnson, having recently holidayed with Rachel Johnson, and had his journalistic career when Boris Johnson was editing the Spectator. What is the point of having connections and not pulling a few strings? If not careful, meritocratic oiks may get a plum job.
I should imagine anyone lecturing people about "global warming" in the north and east of America right now would get short shrift...
Yes I'm aware clime and weather are different... But I don't think people in Europe realize just how extraordinarily cold it's been over the past few days in the US east and mid-west and there does come a point when the cold temperatures become so extreme and severe that you have to wonder how this is being achieved if we've had like decades and decades of AGW?.
Because it used to happen much more frequently. What is now viewed as 'extreme' was at one time a normal winter cold snap.
Case in point. The hills at the back of my house are white today but it is sleety rain on us and 2-3 degrees. 10-15 years ago we may well have been snowed in. And I might have missed my cappuccino (with chocolate sprinkles). Great stuff this global warming.
Frankly, why on earth would anyone have a cappuccino _without_ chocolate sprinkles? They are the entire point of the drink.
Mr. Foxy, it's a combination of being in government and not being fashionable. Social media bubbles overall favour the bleeding heart left over the fiscally dry right.
Look at this way. Would you expect the average Conservative voter (let alone member) to be pro-EU, hostile to capitalism, and socially liberal?
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
The left (combined) has always been the wing of protest, and a lot of people on the left want to protest at the moment. Whats the point of being in a political party unless you want to enact change, and it's the left which want change right now.
If/when the left get into power, then the power dymanic will shift.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
Why would anyone want to join any party? Only < 1m political party members throughout the UK.
Most people just get on with it and register their interest at the ballot box.
Not literal nepotism, but he was appointed by Jo Johnson, having recently holidayed with Rachel Johnson, and had his journalistic career when Boris Johnson was editing the Spectator. What is the point of having connections and not pulling a few strings? If not careful, meritocratic oiks may get a plum job.
So not nepotism. Glad we got that sorted out.
As to whom he associates with, and what influence that has on these appointments, goodness only knows.
Wasn't Young on holiday with Jo Johnson's sister when his latest appointment was announced? And didn't Boris give him his first gig at the Speccie when he was editor?
Mr. Foxy, it's a combination of being in government and not being fashionable. Social media bubbles overall favour the bleeding heart left over the fiscally dry right.
Hardly, though the paranoid ranters of the alt. right perhaps could not be included in the fiscally dry camp.
Seriously, other than personal ambition, why would a socially liberal moderate conservative join the current local associations? just look at the abuse heaped on Soubry, Morgan, Wollaston etc. These are a few of the Tories that I would consider voting for, but increasingly atypical.
Not literal nepotism, but he was appointed by Jo Johnson, having recently holidayed with Rachel Johnson, and had his journalistic career when Boris Johnson was editing the Spectator. What is the point of having connections and not pulling a few strings? If not careful, meritocratic oiks may get a plum job.
Not literal nepotism, but he was appointed by Jo Johnson, having recently holidayed with Rachel Johnson, and had his journalistic career when Boris Johnson was editing the Spectator. What is the point of having connections and not pulling a few strings? If not careful, meritocratic oiks may get a plum job.
So not nepotism. Glad we got that sorted out.
As to whom he associates with, and what influence that has on these appointments, goodness only knows.
I see Foxy beat me to it. However..
nepotism ˈnɛpətɪz(ə)m/ noun noun: nepotism
the practice among those with power or influence of favouring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs.
Wasn't Young on holiday with Jo Johnson's sister when his latest appointment was announced? And didn't Boris give him his first gig at the Speccie when he was editor?
Could all be coincidence of course.
Could be, might not be.
But aside from being quite an irritating dick, no one can say that Young is not eminently well qualified for the job.
Mr. Foxy, it's a combination of being in government and not being fashionable. Social media bubbles overall favour the bleeding heart left over the fiscally dry right.
Hardly, though the paranoid ranters of the alt. right perhaps could not be included in the fiscally dry camp.
Seriously, other than personal ambition, why would a socially liberal moderate conservative join the current local associations? just look at the abuse heaped on Soubry, Morgan, Wollaston etc. These are a few of the Tories that I would consider voting for, but increasingly atypical.
The same could be said of the labour party. They seem to be having the same issues with their moderates (see the attacks on people like Stella Creasey).
The membership of both parties are swinging away from the centre. If JRM or some other right-winger became leader then the membership might pick up picking up a lot of fruit-loops from UKIP.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Well, it proves that Conservative members hold Conservative opinions.
Yeah, and it tells us a bit more than that.
It also tells us that members of left wing parties have left wing opinions.
It tells us the demographics of party members - particularly that Labour’s membership isn’t all that young in comparison to the Tories - which given Corbyn’s popularity among my generation is an interesting finding, as well as the extent to which over 65s, men and ABC1s dominate party membership.
I could have guessed the views of Labour, LDs, and SNP members but their findings Conservative members views on moral censorship, big business, and wealth were not predictable. None of the Tories on here actually speak of censoring films and magazines, there’s been criticism of Apple, Google on here as of late etc.
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yes, we know that Tory party members are eurosceptic, but the research has clearly found more information than that - the article also talks about more that. E.g. the implications of the views and demographics of Tory members on the party’s political hopes in the future.
‘The question is how the Conservatives will cope when, as seems likely, the proportion of the electorate which share these characteristics begins to shrink. A party's members constitute an important part of its sales force and its public face. They need to be numerous enough, young enough, diverse enough, open-minded enough, and tech-savvy enough, to ensure that it can come up with candidates and a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
Why would anyone want to join any party? Only < 1m political party members throughout the UK.
Most people just get on with it and register their interest at the ballot box.
Those who identify strongly with a party should join. Apart from the obvious fact that if everyone took the attitude of " just get[ting] on with it" (their life, presumably), they wouldn't then be able to "register their interest at the ballot box" as there'd be no-one to run the party, there's the point that larger memberships are less prone to taking erratic and bad decisions - and preventing that is obviously in the interests of those who feel an affinity with that party.
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
What do the Tories see in Toby Young? I don't get it. He is all risk and no upside as far as I can see.
It may be total tinfoilhattery, but there is a theory that some Tories want to go full culture war, circle the Brexit wagons against the marauding tribes of political correctness gone mad and fresh faced, young activists with Jezza tattoos. Toby and blue passports certainly don't provide evidence to the contrary.
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Full disclosure. I've met Toby Young a few times, heard him speak a few times too, and we follow each other on twitter.
I know he has a passion for improving educational standards in this country, as evidenced by the plethora of schools he set up.
I acknowledge running schools isn't quite running/supervising universities but whilst there's more qualified people out there he'd bring a drive to the job, I'd have issues if he was the only one running this universities gig.
As for his past comments, he's a bit like SeanT, who knows Toby Young very well, he's a political shock jock, he says stuff for attention and to wind people up.
I know the country won't be interested in that and Mrs May has erred by announcing this appointment without testing the waters.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
Why would anyone want to join any party? Only < 1m political party members throughout the UK.
Most people just get on with it and register their interest at the ballot box.
Those who identify strongly with a party should join. Apart from the obvious fact that if everyone took the attitude of " just get[ting] on with it" (their life, presumably), they wouldn't then be able to "register their interest at the ballot box" as there'd be no-one to run the party, there's the point that larger memberships are less prone to taking erratic and bad decisions - and preventing that is obviously in the interests of those who feel an affinity with that party.
Does the election and re-election of Corbyn not test that premise rather severely?
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yed a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
None of the countries' parties should be complacent on this score – and all have their quirks: even after the 2017 election, the average Labour member, for instance, is almost certainly more of a well-educated, well-heeled liberal lefty than the average Labour voter.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
Why would anyone want to join any party? Only < 1m political party members throughout the UK.
Most people just get on with it and register their interest at the ballot box.
Those who identify strongly with a party should join. Apart from the obvious fact that if everyone took the attitude of " just get[ting] on with it" (their life, presumably), they wouldn't then be able to "register their interest at the ballot box" as there'd be no-one to run the party, there's the point that larger memberships are less prone to taking erratic and bad decisions - and preventing that is obviously in the interests of those who feel an affinity with that party.
Sounds quite prescriptive. So in your view everyone of voting age should join their preferred party? What about floating voters? Those who lend parties their support on an ad hoc basis?
There are plenty of those interested enough to become members as it is, while the rest, mirroring the voters/non-voters at, say, GEs, can't complain if their party takes a different direction to the one desired.
Edit: I think my point was that those who identify strongly with a party do join. The rest can't be bothered.
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Full disclosure. I've met Toby Young a few times, heard him speak a few times too, and we follow each other on twitter.
I know he has a passion for improving educational standards in this country, as evidenced by the plethora of schools he set up.
I acknowledge running schools isn't quite running/supervising universities but whilst there's more qualified people out there he'd bring a drive to the job, I'd have issues if he was the only one running this universities gig.
As for his past comments, he's a bit like SeanT, who knows Toby Young very well, he's a political shock jock, he says stuff for attention and to wind people up.
I know the country won't be interested in that and Mrs May has erred by announcing this appointment without testing the waters.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
If you wanted to get the lefty PC safe spaces, trigger warnings and ban speakers types out of universities he’s the perfect choice.
That his appointment led to Twitter going completely nuts for two days probably tells you he’s the right man for the job!
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Full disclosure. I've met Toby Young a few times, heard him speak a few times too, and we follow each other on twitter.
I know he has a passion for improving educational standards in this country, as evidenced by the plethora of schools he set up.
I acknowledge running schools isn't quite running/supervising universities but whilst there's more qualified people out there he'd bring a drive to the job, I'd have issues if he was the only one running this universities gig.
As for his past comments, he's a bit like SeanT, who knows Toby Young very well, he's a political shock jock, he says stuff for attention and to wind people up.
I know the country won't be interested in that and Mrs May has erred by announcing this appointment without testing the waters.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
On the final point, he's not the only one doing the job though, so if he has any weaknesses then other people on the board can cover that.
I agree with you on Toby Young though, his passion for education is clear to anyone who takes more than a few minutes to listen to him or read what he has written. The political point scoring over anything he's previously written or said to try and get rid of him just loses white working class children a major ally in their struggle to get a decent education.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Full disclosure. I've met Toby Young a few times, heard him speak a few times too, and we follow each other on twitter.
I know he has a passion for improving educational standards in this country, as evidenced by the plethora of schools he set up.
I acknowledge running schools isn't quite running/supervising universities but whilst there's more qualified people out there he'd bring a drive to the job, I'd have issues if he was the only one running this universities gig.
As for his past comments, he's a bit like SeanT, who knows Toby Young very well, he's a political shock jock, he says stuff for attention and to wind people up.
I know the country won't be interested in that and Mrs May has erred by announcing this appointment without testing the waters.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
That sounds a reasonable summary. Still, if a controversialist is thought to be a sensible appointment, my earlier suggestion of Fiona Millar for balance might actually be sensible. Many of the Young comments might equally well apply to her...
The Tories need a spell in opposition. Big boosts in membership require it, and whilst in government their membership can only continue to fall - especially given that their age profile as recently reported must give their membership base a high mortality rate.
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Full disclosure. I've met Toby Young a few times, heard him speak a few times too, and we follow each other on twitter.
I know he has a passion for improving educational standards in this country, as evidenced by the plethora of schools he set up.
I acknowledge running schools isn't quite running/supervising universities but whilst there's more qualified people out there he'd bring a drive to the job, I'd have issues if he was the only one running this universities gig.
As for his past comments, he's a bit like SeanT, who knows Toby Young very well, he's a political shock jock, he says stuff for attention and to wind people up.
I know the country won't be interested in that and Mrs May has erred by announcing this appointment without testing the waters.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
On the final point, he's not the only one doing the job though, so if he has any weaknesses then other people on the board can cover that.
I agree with you on Toby Young though, his passion for education is clear to anyone who takes more than a few minutes to listen to him or read what he has written. The political point scoring over anything he's previously written or said to try and get rid of him just loses white working class children a major ally in their struggle to get a decent education.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
Look at the furore on the left over council house sales. Perish the thought that any beneficiary should have wised up, and sold their houses on for a fortune, thereby becoming a member of the hated bourgeoisie.
What's hilarious about this Trump book is that even with all of the disasters described in it, Hilary still lost to Don. What an awful candidate she was.
Indeed. Although you could make that comment in reverse too. Had the Republicans picked a bog-standard competent candidate, they would likely have won with their biggest ECV since 1988 - though that's a pretty hypothetical situation given the nature of the runners-up to Trump. Indeed, what's remarkable about the 2016 race is that despite the fact they were both dreadful candidates, you can't really say that the primary voters were wrong to pick Hillary over Sanders, or Trump over Cruz.
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
On the final point, he's not the only one doing the job though, so if he has any weaknesses then other people on the board can cover that.
I agree with you on Toby Young though, his passion for education is clear to anyone who takes more than a few minutes to listen to him or read what he has written. The political point scoring over anything he's previously written or said to try and get rid of him just loses white working class children a major ally in their struggle to get a decent education.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
On ‘universally unattractive’ working-class students at Oxford In a 1988 book The Oxford Myth, Young wrote about working class students, or “stains”, arriving at Oxford.
It was as if all the meritocratic fantasies of every 1960s educationalist had come true and all Harold Wilson’s children had been let in at the gate … Small, vaguely deformed undergraduates would scuttle across the quad as if carrying mobile homes on their backs. Replete with acne and anoraks, they would peer up through thick pebble-glasses, pausing only to blow their noses
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
On the final point, he's not the only one doing the job though, so if he has any weaknesses then other people on the board can cover that.
I agree with you on Toby Young though, his passion for education is clear to anyone who takes more than a few minutes to listen to him or read what he has written. The political point scoring over anything he's previously written or said to try and get rid of him just loses white working class children a major ally in their struggle to get a decent education.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
On ‘universally unattractive’ working-class students at Oxford In a 1988 book The Oxford Myth, Young wrote about working class students, or “stains”, arriving at Oxford.
It was as if all the meritocratic fantasies of every 1960s educationalist had come true and all Harold Wilson’s children had been let in at the gate … Small, vaguely deformed undergraduates would scuttle across the quad as if carrying mobile homes on their backs. Replete with acne and anoraks, they would peer up through thick pebble-glasses, pausing only to blow their noses
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Full disclosure. I've met Toby Young a few times, heard him speak a few times too, and we follow each other on twitter.
I know he has a passion for improving educational standards in this country, as evidenced by the plethora of schools he set up.
I acknowledge running schools isn't quite running/supervising universities but whilst there's more qualified people out there he'd bring a drive to the job, I'd have issues if he was the only one running this universities gig.
As for his past comments, he's a bit like SeanT, who knows Toby Young very well, he's a political shock jock, he says stuff for attention and to wind people up.
I know the country won't be interested in that and Mrs May has erred by announcing this appointment without testing the waters.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
If you wanted to get the lefty PC safe spaces, trigger warnings and ban speakers types out of universities he’s the perfect choice.
That his appointment led to Twitter going completely nuts for two days probably tells you he’s the right man for the job!
Just like when Twitter was critical of the Tories during the GE it was a good omen for the Tory party? I wonder how that turned out.
I doubt Toby Young is going to get those things out of universities - if anything students are likely to become more anti-Tory than they were before as a result of this appointment.
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
Why would anyone want to join any party? Only < 1m political party members throughout the UK.
Most people just get on with it and register their interest at the ballot box.
Those who identify strongly with a party should join. Apart from the obvious fact that if everyone took the attitude of " just get[ting] on with it" (their life, presumably), they wouldn't then be able to "register their interest at the ballot box" as there'd be no-one to run the party, there's the point that larger memberships are less prone to taking erratic and bad decisions - and preventing that is obviously in the interests of those who feel an affinity with that party.
Sounds quite prescriptive. So in your view everyone of voting age should join their preferred party? What about floating voters? Those who lend parties their support on an ad hoc basis?
There are plenty of those interested enough to become members as it is, while the rest, mirroring the voters/non-voters at, say, GEs, can't complain if their party takes a different direction to the one desired.
Edit: I think my point was that those who identify strongly with a party do join. The rest can't be bothered.
Your edit repeats my first sentence, almost word for word, except I replace 'do' with 'should'. In reality, they don't; the country - and they - would benefit if they did but they don't really see that and from experience, it's very difficult to persuade them.
(By 'should', I don't mean 'need to be compelled to'; I mean 'it would be better if they did').
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
On the final point, he's not the only one doing the job though, so if he has any weaknesses then other people on the board can cover that.
I agree with you on Toby Young though, his passion for education is clear to anyone who takes more than a few minutes to listen to him or read what he has written. The political point scoring over anything he's previously written or said to try and get rid of him just loses white working class children a major ally in their struggle to get a decent education.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
On ‘universally unattractive’ working-class students at Oxford In a 1988 book The Oxford Myth, Young wrote about working class students, or “stains”, arriving at Oxford.
It was as if all the meritocratic fantasies of every 1960s educationalist had come true and all Harold Wilson’s children had been let in at the gate … Small, vaguely deformed undergraduates would scuttle across the quad as if carrying mobile homes on their backs. Replete with acne and anoraks, they would peer up through thick pebble-glasses, pausing only to blow their noses
Yes, Tobes needs to explain his journey: how he went from sneering at the oiks who lowered the tone of his Oxford college to becoming their champion and saviour. It will be a fascinating story if he can tell it convincingly.
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
Why would anyone want to join any party? Only < 1m political party members throughout the UK.
Most people just get on with it and register their interest at the ballot box.
Those who identify strongly with a party should join. Apart from the obvious fact that if everyone took the attitude of " just get[ting] on with it" (their life, presumably), they wouldn't then be able to "register their interest at the ballot box" as there'd be no-one to run the party, there's the point that larger memberships are less prone to taking erratic and bad decisions - and preventing that is obviously in the interests of those who feel an affinity with that party.
Sounds quite prescriptive. So in your view everyone of voting age should join their preferred party? What about floating voters? Those who lend parties their support on an ad hoc basis?
There are plenty of those interested enough to become members as it is, while the rest, mirroring the voters/non-voters at, say, GEs, can't complain if their party takes a different direction to the one desired.
Edit: I think my point was that those who identify strongly with a party do join. The rest can't be bothered.
Your edit repeats my first sentence, almost word for word, except I replace 'do' with 'should'. In reality, they don't; the country - and they - would benefit if they did but they don't really see that and from experience, it's very difficult to persuade them.
(By 'should', I don't mean 'need to be compelled to'; I mean 'it would be better if they did').
Yes I actually need to start reading peoples' posts before I comment on them!
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
On the final point, he's not the only one doing the job though, so if he has any weaknesses then other people on the board can cover that.
I agree with you on Toby Young though, his passion for education is clear to anyone who takes more than a few minutes to listen to him or read what he has written. The political point scoring over anything he's previously written or said to try and get rid of him just loses white working class children a major ally in their struggle to get a decent education.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
On ‘universally unattractive’ working-class students at Oxford In a 1988 book The Oxford Myth, Young wrote about working class students, or “stains”, arriving at Oxford.
It was as if all the meritocratic fantasies of every 1960s educationalist had come true and all Harold Wilson’s children had been let in at the gate … Small, vaguely deformed undergraduates would scuttle across the quad as if carrying mobile homes on their backs. Replete with acne and anoraks, they would peer up through thick pebble-glasses, pausing only to blow their noses
And yet his schools have some of the highest proportions of FSM children in the areas they are based. What's more relevant, his actions from today or something he wrote 30 years ago?
Hangers, floggers, xenophobes, curtain-twitchers and technophobes. It's long way from the Cameroon vision of modernisation, for sure.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
Why would anyone want to join any party? Only < 1m political party members throughout the UK.
Most people just get on with it and register their interest at the ballot box.
Those who identify strongly with a party should join. Apart from the obvious fact that if everyone took the attitude of " just get[ting] on with it" (their life, presumably), they wouldn't then be able to "register their interest at the ballot box" as there'd be no-one to run the party, there's the point that larger memberships are less prone to taking erratic and bad decisions - and preventing that is obviously in the interests of those who feel an affinity with that party.
Does the election and re-election of Corbyn not test that premise rather severely?
No - on the contrary. Firstly, there were lots of entryists who are more noturally Greens, Respect and other wacky far-left inclined; but more importantly, Corbyn was able to win because the moderate centre-left weren't there in sufficient numbers whereas the more motivated radicals were.
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
On the final point, he's not the only one doing the job though, so if he has any weaknesses then other people on the board can cover that.
I agree with you on Toby Young though, his passion for education is clear to anyone who takes more than a few minutes to listen to him or read what he has written. The political point scoring over anything he's previously written or said to try and get rid of him just loses white working class children a major ally in their struggle to get a decent education.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
On ‘universally unattractive’ working-class students at Oxford In a 1988 book The Oxford Myth, Young wrote about working class students, or “stains”, arriving at Oxford.
It was as if all the meritocratic fantasies of every 1960s educationalist had come true and all Harold Wilson’s children had been let in at the gate … Small, vaguely deformed undergraduates would scuttle across the quad as if carrying mobile homes on their backs. Replete with acne and anoraks, they would peer up through thick pebble-glasses, pausing only to blow their noses
Yes, Tobes needs to explain his journey: how he went from sneering at the oiks who lowered the tone of his Oxford college to becoming their champion and saviour. It will be a fascinating story if he can tell it convincingly.
@TOPPING And? It hardly suggests Young is a great champion of big believer in the potential of working class kids. Then there’s his weird eugenics idea which is more recent....
On eugenics and selective breeding for high IQ In a 2015 essay for the Australian publication The Quadrant, entitled The fall of the meritocracy, under a section headed “Progressive eugenics”, Young proposed that poorer people should be helped to choose which embryos were allowed to develop, based on intelligence.
My proposal is this: once this technology [genetically engineered intelligence] becomes available, why not offer it free of charge to parents on low incomes with below-average IQs? Provided there is sufficient take-up, it could help to address the problem of flat-lining inter-generational social mobility and serve as a counterweight to the tendency for the meritocratic elite to become a hereditary elite. It might make all the difference when it comes to the long-term sustainability of advanced meritocratic societies.
One thing that may have been missed in the discussion on Toby Young. One of the political goals of the new Student office body is to help facilitate new (especially private) providers of HE. Young presumably has considerable experience now of new educational providers thanks to Free school work.
@TOPPING And? It hardly suggests Young is a great champion of big believer in the potential of working class kids. Then there’s his weird eugenics idea which is more recent....
On eugenics and selective breeding for high IQ In a 2015 essay for the Australian publication The Quadrant, entitled The fall of the meritocracy, under a section headed “Progressive eugenics”, Young proposed that poorer people should be helped to choose which embryos were allowed to develop, based on intelligence.
My proposal is this: once this technology [genetically engineered intelligence] becomes available, why not offer it free of charge to parents on low incomes with below-average IQs? Provided there is sufficient take-up, it could help to address the problem of flat-lining inter-generational social mobility and serve as a counterweight to the tendency for the meritocratic elite to become a hereditary elite. It might make all the difference when it comes to the long-term sustainability of advanced meritocratic societies.
Do you think he might have been indulging in hyperbole in order to highlight an issue which he evidently feels strongly about - the hereditary elite - rather than he actually thinks people should be socially engineered?
Mind you, having said I'm skeptical about AGW I do think it's sensible to de-carbonize... And it's something that will happen anyway through technological advance.
But it needs to happen sensibly... Governments forcing it through taxation so we reach a level where only the very rich can afford to heat their mansions in the winter while the old and poor are left to freeze doesn't help things.
To me, it was always sensible to push the line "It seems there is evidence that the Earth's climate is warming. We don't have enough data points to know if this is largely man-made, an entirely natural cycle over which we have no control (there have been recent Ice Ages and warmings for which we were clearly not responsible) - or a combination. We don't even know if the data shows a short-term blip that will self-correct, or a remorseless trend.
HOWEVER, to protect its future generations (and the planet's biodiversity) humanity should take the safety-first approach. We should move towards practical steps that could reduce elements of man-made warming, wherever we can. And urgently."
Perhaps more controversially, I would suggest that climate-change denial has been a reactive response to those who are saying with religious fervour that there is no doubt at all that climate change is man-made. Neither is a helpful response to getting everybody on board to manage a significant threat.
Quite - the green zealots are the problem, not the deniers. It seems that a bunch of radicals want to force the rest of the world rapidly to deal with the issue. As usual a large section of the population have reacted against that by wanting to go slower and/or resist the zealotry involved. Simple human nature.
As history has shown time and again, one must never let the zealots get their way, too much human suffering has been caused by zealots of all creeds.
So even if they are right, the green lobby must not be believed wholesale (hence healthy scepticism) and the blind pursuit of their aims that certain governments have fallen for has resulted in gross stupidity like OTT subsidies for windfarms.
""It seems there is evidence that the Earth's climate is warming. We don't have enough data points to know if this is largely man-made, an entirely natural cycle over which we have no control (there have been recent Ice Ages and warmings for which we were clearly not responsible) - or a combination. We don't even know if the data shows a short-term blip that will self-correct, or a remorseless trend."
But we do.
No we don't. That in the end is the basic problem and the one that most AGW advocates - including yourself it seems - have failed to understand.
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
On the final point, he's not the only one doing the job though, so if he has any weaknesses then other people on the board can cover that.
I agree with you on Toby Young though, his passion for education is clear to anyone who takes more than a few minutes to listen to him or read what he has written. The political point scoring over anything he's previously written or said to try and get rid of him just loses white working class children a major ally in their struggle to get a decent education.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
On ‘universally unattractive’ working-class students at Oxford In a 1988 book The Oxford Myth, Young wrote about working class students, or “stains”, arriving at Oxford.
It was as if all the meritocratic fantasies of every 1960s educationalist had come true and all Harold Wilson’s children had been let in at the gate … Small, vaguely deformed undergraduates would scuttle across the quad as if carrying mobile homes on their backs. Replete with acne and anoraks, they would peer up through thick pebble-glasses, pausing only to blow their noses
@TOPPING And? It hardly suggests Young is a great champion of big believer in the potential of working class kids. Then there’s his weird eugenics idea which is more recent....
On eugenics and selective breeding for high IQ In a 2015 essay for the Australian publication The Quadrant, entitled The fall of the meritocracy, under a section headed “Progressive eugenics”, Young proposed that poorer people should be helped to choose which embryos were allowed to develop, based on intelligence.
My proposal is this: once this technology [genetically engineered intelligence] becomes available, why not offer it free of charge to parents on low incomes with below-average IQs? Provided there is sufficient take-up, it could help to address the problem of flat-lining inter-generational social mobility and serve as a counterweight to the tendency for the meritocratic elite to become a hereditary elite. It might make all the difference when it comes to the long-term sustainability of advanced meritocratic societies.
Do you think he might have been indulging in hyperbole in order to highlight an issue which he evidently feels strongly about - the hereditary elite - rather than he actually thinks people should be socially engineered?
See Swift, "A Modest Proposal For preventing the Children of Poor People From being a Burthen to Their Parents or Country".
I knew that Momentum were going to have a field day with this.
So Momentum thinks it is fair game to attack people for *interesting* views and their past.
Game on.
Are you defending the Toby Young appointment?
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
On the final point, he's not the only one doing the job though, so if he has any weaknesses then other people on the board can cover that.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
On ‘universally unattractive’ working-class students at Oxford In a 1988 book The Oxford Myth, Young wrote about working class students, or “stains”, arriving at Oxford.
It was as if all the meritocratic fantasies of every 1960s educationalist had come true and all Harold Wilson’s children had been let in at the gate … Small, vaguely deformed undergraduates would scuttle across the quad as if carrying mobile homes on their backs. Replete with acne and anoraks, they would peer up through thick pebble-glasses, pausing only to blow their noses
And yet his schools have some of the highest proportions of FSM children in the areas they are based. What's more relevant, his actions from today or something he wrote 30 years ago?
@TOPPING And? It hardly suggests Young is a great champion of big believer in the potential of working class kids. Then there’s his weird eugenics idea which is more recent....
On eugenics and selective breeding for high IQ In a 2015 essay for the Australian publication The Quadrant, entitled The fall of the meritocracy, under a section headed “Progressive eugenics”, Young proposed that poorer people should be helped to choose which embryos were allowed to develop, based on intelligence.
My proposal is this: once this technology [genetically engineered intelligence] becomes available, why not offer it free of charge to parents on low incomes with below-average IQs? Provided there is sufficient take-up, it could help to address the problem of flat-lining inter-generational social mobility and serve as a counterweight to the tendency for the meritocratic elite to become a hereditary elite. It might make all the difference when it comes to the long-term sustainability of advanced meritocratic societies.
Do you think he might have been indulging in hyperbole in order to highlight an issue which he evidently feels strongly about - the hereditary elite - rather than he actually thinks people should be socially engineered?
Um, nope. If he doesn’t feel people should be socially engineered, perhaps he shouldn’t suggest it?
I must say that I'm not at all surprised by the revelation that members of the Conservative Party are right wing and Eurosceptic.
Yed a ground campaign capable of appealing to 21st century Great Britain.
Yet, as things currently stand, the Tories probably have more to worry about than their main rivals. Whether they can do much to alter the situation and attract a different kind of member in the near future remains to be seen.’
While some of the socially conservative views of Conservative party members aren’t that surprising, that so many of them don’t see anything wrong with the current economic settlement is a bit surprising.
.
It does partly explain the continuous downward trend of Tory membership, at a time when Labour, LD, Green, SNP memberships have risen significantly.
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
Why would anyone want to join any party? Only < 1m political party members throughout the UK.
Most people just get on with it and register their interest at the ballot box.
Those who identify strongly with a party should join. Apart from the obvious fact that if everyone took the attitude of " just get[ting] on with it" (their life, presumably), they wouldn't then be able to "register their interest at the ballot box" as there'd be no-one to run the party, there's the point that larger memberships are less prone to taking erratic and bad decisions - and preventing that is obviously in the interests of those who feel an affinity with that party.
Sounds quite prescriptive. So in your view everyone of voting age should join their preferred party? What about floating voters? Those who lend parties their support on an ad hoc basis?
There are plenty of those interested enough to become members as it is, while the rest, mirroring the voters/non-voters at, say, GEs, can't complain if their party takes a different direction to the one desired.
Edit: I think my point was that those who identify strongly with a party do join. The rest can't be bothered.
Many people identify very strongly with a particular party philosophically speaking and always vote for them come rain or shine, yet hold the not unreasonable view that members of political parties tend to be weirdos, knobheads and self-serving political careerists (often all three). Local political parties are also notoriously bureaucratic, petty and run by cliques who are unwelcoming of newcomers.
@TOPPING And? It hardly suggests Young is a great champion of big believer in the potential of working class kids. Then there’s his weird eugenics idea which is more recent....
On eugenics and selective breeding for high IQ In a 2015 essay for the Australian publication The Quadrant, entitled The fall of the meritocracy, under a section headed “Progressive eugenics”, Young proposed that poorer people should be helped to choose which embryos were allowed to develop, based on intelligence.
My proposal is this: once this technology [genetically engineered intelligence] becomes available, why not offer it free of charge to parents on low incomes with below-average IQs? Provided there is sufficient take-up, it could help to address the problem of flat-lining inter-generational social mobility and serve as a counterweight to the tendency for the meritocratic elite to become a hereditary elite. It might make all the difference when it comes to the long-term sustainability of advanced meritocratic societies.
Do you think he might have been indulging in hyperbole in order to highlight an issue which he evidently feels strongly about - the hereditary elite - rather than he actually thinks people should be socially engineered?
Um, nope. If he doesn’t feel people should be socially engineered, perhaps he shouldn’t suggest it?
OK I've skim read the article. Yes he does put it forward as an option (albeit with yet-to-exist technology). He cites it as redistribution of intelligence rather than wealth and yes that will be pretty objectionable to many (he also uses the example of hereditary diseases).
But more than that, given the pre-amble to that particular part of the essay, I maintain that he is citing radical solutions for radical, intractable problems. Did he mean it not as satire? Not 100% sure. Perhaps @TSE can enlighten us after he next bumps into him down the pub.
After comparing the president’s tweets to Fox coverage every day since October, I can tell you that the Fox-Trump feedback loop is happening far more often than you think. There is no strategy to Trump’s Twitter feed; he is not trying to distract the media. He is being distracted. He darts with quark-like speed from topic to topic in his tweets because that’s how cable news works.
Here’s what’s also shocking: A man with unparalleled access to the world’s most powerful information-gathering machine, with an intelligence budget estimated at $73 billion last year, prefers to rely on conservative cable news hosts to understand current events….
@TOPPING And? It hardly suggests Young is a great champion of big believer in the potential of working class kids. Then there’s his weird eugenics idea which is more recent....
On eugenics and selective breeding for high IQ In a 2015 essay for the Australian publication The Quadrant, entitled The fall of the meritocracy, under a section headed “Progressive eugenics”, Young proposed that poorer people should be helped to choose which embryos were allowed to develop, based on intelligence.
My proposal is this: once this technology [genetically engineered intelligence] becomes available, why not offer it free of charge to parents on low incomes with below-average IQs? Provided there is sufficient take-up, it could help to address the problem of flat-lining inter-generational social mobility and serve as a counterweight to the tendency for the meritocratic elite to become a hereditary elite. It might make all the difference when it comes to the long-term sustainability of advanced meritocratic societies.
Do you think he might have been indulging in hyperbole in order to highlight an issue which he evidently feels strongly about - the hereditary elite - rather than he actually thinks people should be socially engineered?
Um, nope. If he doesn’t feel people should be socially engineered, perhaps he shouldn’t suggest it?
OK I've skim read the article. Yes he does put it forward as an option (albeit with yet-to-exist technology). He cites it as redistribution of intelligence rather than wealth and yes that will be pretty objectionable to many (he also uses the example of hereditary diseases).
But more than that, given the pre-amble to that particular part of the essay, I maintain that he is citing radical solutions for radical, intractable problems. Did he mean it not as satire? Not 100% sure. Perhaps @TSE can enlighten us after he next bumps into him down the pub.
I have doubts that there aren’t other radical solutions he could have opted for, solutions which don’t look so bad....
What actions from 30 years ago, they were just words. He's not any longer but he set them up that way. I remember reading his fairly detailed articles in the telegraph all those years ago when he was struggling to convince people that taking a higher proportion of his intake from poorer backgrounds would work and setting them high expectations was part of the answer.
You need to step back and look at the whole picture, not just one or two isolated things. The fact that he has previously said these things and now has a different view is why he's an ideal candidate.
Take my own views as an example, I think everyone on here would agree that when it comes to housing investment I'm absolutely against private landlords and "investors" buying up existing property and pricing out FTBs. In my early 20s I was planning on having 7-9 BTLs by the time I turned 30 (which I probably could have done by now, if I had held the same views). If the government had a body which intends to help FTBs into housing, should I be excluded because of my previous views on the subject of ownership and investment?
Comments
https://twitter.com/hackneyglyn/status/948973281272573953
The Death penalty still had a sizeable amount of support - but on issues like gay marriage....
Perhaps the trouble is that the views do pose an issue for the demographics the Tory party needs to attract - particularly those in their thirties and forties, who moved more towards Labour last time out. Somehow I doubt the views such as disliking gay marriage, and believing that everything is all fine with the current economic settlement are going to win them over.
Game on.
Edited extra bit: Mr. L, Afzal's also talked a lot of sense about rape gangs.
He's clearly a loose canon and his ideas aren't that interesting.
Like a man considering sex with a vacuum cleaner, an unhappy end was all too likely.
I am surprised despite your less than politically correct moments I wouldnt have thought you would defend his appointment.
As history has shown time and again, one must never let the zealots get their way, too much human suffering has been caused by zealots of all creeds.
So even if they are right, the green lobby must not be believed wholesale (hence healthy scepticism) and the blind pursuit of their aims that certain governments have fallen for has resulted in gross stupidity like OTT subsidies for windfarms.
https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/949003931325263873
But we do.
https://www.standard.co.uk/lifestyle/books/fire-and-fury-review-michael-wolff-donald-trump-book-inside-the-white-house-a3732751.html
Why would a moderate, socially liberal person want to join? other than while feeling for their wallet, and Brexit has interfered even with that.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42579990
If/when the left get into power, then the power dymanic will shift.
Most people just get on with it and register their interest at the ballot box.
As to whom he associates with, and what influence that has on these appointments, goodness only knows.
Could all be coincidence of course.
Seriously, other than personal ambition, why would a socially liberal moderate conservative join the current local associations? just look at the abuse heaped on Soubry, Morgan, Wollaston etc. These are a few of the Tories that I would consider voting for, but increasingly atypical.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durian
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2001/jun/29/comment
60 years later his son takes it to another level.
nepotism
ˈnɛpətɪz(ə)m/
noun
noun: nepotism
the practice among those with power or influence of favouring relatives or friends, especially by giving them jobs.
But aside from being quite an irritating dick, no one can say that Young is not eminently well qualified for the job.
The membership of both parties are swinging away from the centre. If JRM or some other right-winger became leader then the membership might pick up picking up a lot of fruit-loops from UKIP.
I could have guessed the views of Labour, LDs, and SNP members but their findings Conservative members views on moral censorship, big business, and wealth were not predictable. None of the Tories on here actually speak of censoring films and magazines, there’s been criticism of Apple, Google on here as of late etc.
'Tories must come clean on membership figures - ex-chairman'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42565294
I know he has a passion for improving educational standards in this country, as evidenced by the plethora of schools he set up.
I acknowledge running schools isn't quite running/supervising universities but whilst there's more qualified people out there he'd bring a drive to the job, I'd have issues if he was the only one running this universities gig.
As for his past comments, he's a bit like SeanT, who knows Toby Young very well, he's a political shock jock, he says stuff for attention and to wind people up.
I know the country won't be interested in that and Mrs May has erred by announcing this appointment without testing the waters.
Were job specs solely based on passion for improving the lot of working class kids and improving educational standards Toby Young is qualified for the job.
But those aren't the only specs for the job.
There are plenty of those interested enough to become members as it is, while the rest, mirroring the voters/non-voters at, say, GEs, can't complain if their party takes a different direction to the one desired.
Edit: I think my point was that those who identify strongly with a party do join. The rest can't be bothered.
https://security.googleblog.com/2018/01/more-details-about-mitigations-for-cpu_4.html
That his appointment led to Twitter going completely nuts for two days probably tells you he’s the right man for the job!
I agree with you on Toby Young though, his passion for education is clear to anyone who takes more than a few minutes to listen to him or read what he has written. The political point scoring over anything he's previously written or said to try and get rid of him just loses white working class children a major ally in their struggle to get a decent education.
I guess that's why Labour are pushing so hard to get rid of him, they can't afford for WWC children to get an education and get off a future of benefits/crime/poverty.
Still, if a controversialist is thought to be a sensible appointment, my earlier suggestion of Fiona Millar for balance might actually be sensible.
Many of the Young comments might equally well apply to her...
In a 1988 book The Oxford Myth, Young wrote about working class students, or “stains”, arriving at Oxford.
It was as if all the meritocratic fantasies of every 1960s educationalist had come true and all Harold Wilson’s children had been let in at the gate … Small, vaguely deformed undergraduates would scuttle across the quad as if carrying mobile homes on their backs. Replete with acne and anoraks, they would peer up through thick pebble-glasses, pausing only to blow their noses
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/media/2018/jan/03/toby-young-quotes-on-breasts-eugenics-and-working-class-people
I doubt Toby Young is going to get those things out of universities - if anything students are likely to become more anti-Tory than they were before as a result of this appointment.
(By 'should', I don't mean 'need to be compelled to'; I mean 'it would be better if they did').
And? It hardly suggests Young is a great champion of big believer in the potential of working class kids. Then there’s his weird eugenics idea which is more recent....
On eugenics and selective breeding for high IQ
In a 2015 essay for the Australian publication The Quadrant, entitled The fall of the meritocracy, under a section headed “Progressive eugenics”, Young proposed that poorer people should be helped to choose which embryos were allowed to develop, based on intelligence.
My proposal is this: once this technology [genetically engineered intelligence] becomes available, why not offer it free of charge to parents on low incomes with below-average IQs? Provided there is sufficient take-up, it could help to address the problem of flat-lining inter-generational social mobility and serve as a counterweight to the tendency for the meritocratic elite to become a hereditary elite. It might make all the difference when it comes to the long-term sustainability of advanced meritocratic societies.
But more than that, given the pre-amble to that particular part of the essay, I maintain that he is citing radical solutions for radical, intractable problems. Did he mean it not as satire? Not 100% sure. Perhaps @TSE can enlighten us after he next bumps into him down the pub.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/01/05/trump-media-feedback-loop-216248
After comparing the president’s tweets to Fox coverage every day since October, I can tell you that the Fox-Trump feedback loop is happening far more often than you think. There is no strategy to Trump’s Twitter feed; he is not trying to distract the media. He is being distracted. He darts with quark-like speed from topic to topic in his tweets because that’s how cable news works.
Here’s what’s also shocking: A man with unparalleled access to the world’s most powerful information-gathering machine, with an intelligence budget estimated at $73 billion last year, prefers to rely on conservative cable news hosts to understand current events….
You need to step back and look at the whole picture, not just one or two isolated things. The fact that he has previously said these things and now has a different view is why he's an ideal candidate.
Take my own views as an example, I think everyone on here would agree that when it comes to housing investment I'm absolutely against private landlords and "investors" buying up existing property and pricing out FTBs. In my early 20s I was planning on having 7-9 BTLs by the time I turned 30 (which I probably could have done by now, if I had held the same views). If the government had a body which intends to help FTBs into housing, should I be excluded because of my previous views on the subject of ownership and investment?