I've posted on it twice. Both times in response to you. You've done a full shift.

Wow. You are working this angle hard.

One out, one in? Will Bulgaria’s new Prime Minister fill Orban’s shoes? One week on from losing their closest ally in the European Union in the form of Viktor Orban, the Kremlin will be hopeful that the newly elected Bulgarian Prime Minister Rumen Radev will be a new voic...

"While Bulgaria’s new leader may have warm words for the Kremlin, the economic reality in which his country finds itself could render any efforts to block support for Ukraine counterproductive and self-defeating". www.bestforbritain.org/one_out_one_in

Agreed.

I know she was seen as doing a very good job. I had not heard anything on the record from this WH administration. And certainly I don't know how she felt about extending. I've heard a lot of people say "they could have extended her for a year" - but she may have said "no, thanks".

And I would have more sympathy with yours if there had ever been a comparable WH administration.

Yes. A party out of power for 14 years, will obvs lack experience, but maybe that makes length of service and pre-2010 junior ministerial posts even more important. I don't think Starmer was meant to win in 2024, tbh. Was installed as interim sanitiser but then BoJo surprised everyone by imploding.

But whether he was a good or bad choice was not the point being investigated here. It is whether Starmer knew a vetting agency expressed a more ambivalent view than "passed/not passed", and whether what reached him eventually was simply "passed". With many people asserting he MUST be lying about it.

Was she viewed favourably? Genuine question. I haven't seen any direct source for that.

I disagree. I think the difference between poor judgment or inspired choice is very often "backfired/panned out" and that seems to me a totally phenomenological way of assessing the original decision.

I think that's a fun response, but sophistry. Starmer had not even been an MP until just over ten years ago. He is relatively inexperienced on the political side of things.

It was certainly a decision with big red-flashing risks and obvious downsides. I would not have made it, but I won't pretend it was incomprehensible, armed with hindsight. Mandelson was not appointed despite who he was, but *because* of it - to interface with a WH that was part of that demimonde.

I think that's normal with Breakfast. It's usually only on for 24hrs.

A lot of people spent days going "OMG OMG OMG popcorn at the ready SiR kEiTh obvs lying; Olly Robbins has the receipts". Now they're like "too clever to get caught, they did it with VIBEZ."

From "Starmer is really bad at politics" straight to "Starmer is Machiavelli reincarnated" - like every week.

This isn't a business. Starmer critics have spent a week telling everyone that Robbins would definitely bring a paper trail that proved the PM was lying. How hard is it to just accept, on one occasion, that the thing your bias hoped for didn't materialise?

Why did BBC Breakfast give Reform UK a special graphic? A small detail in a brief report sparks some big questions about what the national broadcaster is doing during the run up to local and national elections.

NEW | On an odd choice…

WHY DID BBC BREAKFAST GIVE REFORM UK A SPECIAL GRAPHIC?

A small detail in a brief report sparks some big questions about what the national broadcaster is doing during the run up to local and national elections.

brokenbottleboy.substack.com/p/why-did-bb...

I am all for self-improvement. Can you cite some examples?

So far, OR's evidence to Committee amounts to the vibes being very pressure-y. Basically, it looks like he did what *he believed No.10 wanted* without ever checking what that was or who wanted it. So far. Maybe he will open up more as the session goes on or be cornered by a questioner.

So, the BBC political correspondent standing outside No10 reading, at length, directly from Reform's press release, to its own animated party branding, might be ok if they do likewise with other parties, but it's hard to find other examples because they rarely do?

He doesn't even start at the job until next month, so let's not decide in advance.

Well, have you ever seen that or just imagining what might make it ok?

This is live news. Not post-production, where some intern might make a mistake. This has to be prepared ahead of time, ready to deploy on the day. Do you see what I mean?

Sorry, but in what way would this be just one person making a bad call? This has to be asked for and a department would have to make it, in terms of the basic design, someone would have to type in the actual text for this item and cue it up, then gallery would have to call for it.

A #podcast so good I have been saving and treasuring every episode until I have undisturbed time to listen.
Utterly absorbing. @alexpodyssey.bsky.social 's #podyssey

2.3 EUROPA I: Quite a lot of bull
Episode webpage:

Media file: traffic.megaphone.fm/NSR922047208...

I understand the compulsion to make excuses, but no, this isn't defensible, nor is it innocent.

As it always is. Expert I interviewed on Hungarian election made precisely this point - the reason Orban lasted so long is that middle class was doing well. When it started being affected by his policies it turned against him.

To anyone complaining - make sure you confirm within 60mins via the link sent to the email you gave or the complaint is junked. x

New Hungarian PM brutally confronts a news channel that banned him for years.

I appreciate it. Thank you.

It's not a screenshot. It's a video.