frankPodmore

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

Same here. I was in the countryside recently, thought I'd be able to see the Perseid meteor shower but it was impossible: even the little village I was in had bright white streetlights on all night along every road, even the ones with ho houses! This is a village where you rarely see anyone walking, even during the day. So why the streetlights at 2 in the morning?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Several people here have mentioned the genocide in Palestine, which I accept is a major issue and one no one should be dismissive of. Biden himself acknowledged the validity of the issue in his speech to the DNC.

I honestly find Biden's decision to keep spending so much money arming Israel baffling, but there is at least some chance Harris will change that policy.

But if Harris doesn't win the White House, Trump's policies will intensify the perescution of the Palestinians and also lead to pogroms, if not actual genocide, in the US and elsewhere.

I agree this is not a happy choice to have to make. But it's also quite clear which is the right choice.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Tear it all down and start fresh or GTFO.

Okay.

Now what?

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Is that the one that 'Trump campaign officials acknowledge aligns well' with Project 2025? Loads of the policies are identical, not just well-aligned. It's fair game to point up the links between the guy and the document when his ex-staffers wrote the document and his current staffers acknowledge the similarity of the document.

He (or his staff) needs to tell people the actual differences, rather than vague disavowals.

[–] [email protected] 153 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Try to learn Russian really quickly.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Little bit shocked that Bernie Sanders was responsible for two of the misleading claims. Fully half of the, uh, four headings in the article: a 'day of lies', producing four (4) lies? Guess they weren't working too fast.

The Project 2025 stuff IMO is fair game till Trump explains what he'd do differently. As far as I can see, it's at least consistent with his plans. If he wants Dems to shut up about it, he should say which parts and which authors he rejects. He can't just vaguely say, 'That document that says I should be a dictator? Nothing to do with my plans to be a dictator' and expect people to go: okay, cool.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yes, I see the 'few false or misleading claims'. I'd be happier with no lies, I suppose, but the relevant contrast is not with the fantasy land where everyone lives by radical honesty, but with the Republicans, who lie constantly about almost everything.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 day ago

when your own turns on you, it’s a pretty clear sign

Out of curiosity, would you agree this also applies to the numerous Republicans, former allies and employees who have turned on Trump?

[–] [email protected] 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

'Don't make the mistakes I did'?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 days ago

I'm hoping the reforms they're talking about here, which include more joined-up thinking, basically, will have that effect even if they don't invest that much money. But they should also invest the money!

 

I haven't seen anyone mention this, but Harris' framing of 'prosecutor vs. criminal' is pretty similar to Starmer's pitch, particularly when he was still up against Johnson. So, I'd hope the exchange of ideas could go both ways!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago

This sounds very promising and it's clearly in step with the government's overall policy programme, which suggests it will happen in some form.

I especially like the hint that they'd redirect some of the capital funding earmarked for new roads to walking and cycling, ('Asked about the £16bn of trunk road projects, [...] Haigh said: "We're looking at all capital projects, and where that money should be best spent."').

Ultimately, we'll have to wait for the outcome of the transport infrastructure spending review before we know whether this is anything to get excited about.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I would hope the government could come to this conclusion through the review it's already conducting, without the courts forcing it to act. This seems good to keep the pressure on, though.

 

Stand Up To Racism have organised a lot of protests against the Nazi rioters on British streets. Handy list, here, though it by no means covers all the planned riots.

 

Lots of quotes from business leaders in the announcement, but worth noting that the TUC have also welcomed the new fund.

 

Three possibilities come to mind:

Is there an evolutionary purpose?

Does it arise as a consequence of our mental activities, a sort of side effect of our thinking?

Is it given a priori (something we have to think in order to think at all)?

EDIT: Thanks for all the responses! Just one thing I saw come up a few times I'd like to address: a lot of people are asking 'Why assume this?' The answer is: it's purely rhetorical! That said, I'm happy with a well thought-out 'I dispute the premiss' answer.

239
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

And while the Greens are doing what they do best (opposing green development), the Labour government has already lifted the Tory ban on onshore windfarms.

This is odd, because Labour are the same as the Tories, as we all know, and the Greens are a radical new force. But in this case, Labour are doing the direct opposite of the Tories, while the Greens are doing the same things the Tories did! Most curious.

EDIT: Here's the official government statement confirming this.

EDIT 2: And this isn't all! Rachel Reeves is also planning to do more to make onshore wind simpler to build.

 

The Greens promised to push Labour to be more radical but are instead acting how they always have: pro nimby, anti-environment.

I didn't vote Green, obviously. If I had, I imagine I'd be pretty angry that pretty much their first act having quadrupled their number of MPs was to oppose green development.

 

I'm sure you all know this already but it's now official.

The fourth person ever to lead Labour to a majority. The first person since 1970 to win a majority and overturn a majority at the same time.

view more: next ›