Mailwatch(ed) Forum

The green stuff is getting pushed too. By the logic of Bluesky, they shouldn't be doing that because "you can't out Zack Zack", but nobody ever says that. I wonder, is there serious social science research behind the idea that Labour are only helping Farage with the migration stuff? Do we know that the "Red Wall" Labour types who say they want less immigration are insatiable maniacs? I wonder if there's an element of social class here. We who like the green stuff have a reasonable level we can be contented with, those others will never be satisfied on migration. Irregular verb.

Talking of amateur social science a lot of people have suddenly noticed that the Social Democrats in Denmark aren't polling very well, and that's proof of idiot Starmer. A moment's research shows they've been in power since 2011. I would assume they copped a fair bit of backlash from inflation, like Biden, Sunak, Macron, and everyone else. So it's not clear to me from the outline facts (which is after all what loads of commentators just have) that there's electoral oblivion for the centre-left in what Starmer's doing. There's still a route to a decent Labour performance and coalition with other parties who do run on a more liberal programme. That would be a good result.

The assets thing seems to refer to people arriving with lots of property, rather than pulling off the necklace inherited from granny. I suppose some of the people who don't arrive by boat (there are some) may have some assets with them. Seems a bit mean spirited, but I can see where they're coming from.

I've been avoiding Bluesky for the last couple of days. At the moment I don't think I could stand the place there's good people on there but some really aggravating people on there.

Labour deserve a bit of stick in fairness, because it is grim.

This though is something I support. Juries are overrated, mostly. For those worried Warren wasn't onboard with a Labour policy, I am pleased to put your mind at rest. .