I mean, I think that'd e a massively error, even with the socially authoritarian elements of Labour. Austerity was a disaster.

Most comedy's often hint at darker themes without trying to engage with them fully - and I think that is the case here and the comedy and tone is well developed enough to carry it.

The fact that they don't seem to be able to actually, you know, agree on concrete terms rather than what are, at best, gentleman's agreements, is a challenge

Nute, I think you may have overthought what was, in essence, a good comedy film

Good on: Romans, Roma, Mets, Star Wards

Bad on: Thor, Gordon Brown

Are the latter two a coincidence or does Nute just hate great, hulking, beautiful men? who knows?

I'm sorry, Thor 4 *above* 3? That is A Choice

*stares*

I would actually agree that it's a lot of fun. Whather that means it's good, however...

I am *shocked* Nute has bad opinions about something

Chris.

It took them 3 films to land Thor! But they did them close enough (and cheaply enough) to make it work.

They've launched a million characters, barely revisited them and then wonder why audiences haven't engaged with X random person who they may never have seen them again

Actually... 6

Yeah, this is the bit that most astonishes me. They launched him as 'the big, new Marvel character' and then... he's just never appeared again. By comparision managed 4 Captain America appearances in 5 years! I wonder which character audiences will engage with more...

Certainly the social liberal aspect is a part of it

Yeah, Giro already hits issues. Climate change may give you a little more room but not much. Big one would be to push the TdF into early June or early September

Pretty much - there have been so many attempts to make it logical and, frankly, it doesn't work and the season operates pretty well as it is: slow warm up, classic to really get it going, then the GT's for the big show and the WC to cap it off

Partly that, partly he hadnt given them want they were hoping for

I just think they want to get the hit and Robbins wasnt giving it to them

I think the select committee members need to stop asking the same question over and over - and engage with Robbins' responses.

Rule change will help drivers without driveways charge EVs Motorists will be able to have a “gully” to run an electric cable as a permitted development, which can cost £1,000 under current rules

Lots of good green announcements from Miliband's department at the moment.

"Motorists will be able to have a “gully” to run an electric cable [for EVs] as a permitted development, which can cost £1,000 under current rules."
www.thetimes.com/uk/environme...

I don't think saying, broadly, that I'd like a Government which is:

a) Social democratic
b) Socially liberal
c) Not horrible to migrants
d) Pragmatic about trade offs

particularly incoherent or impossible. Frankly those views are basically where most core left wing people are!

I think it could be a lot worse but yes, not good either

It'll help us to ride out fossil fuel shocks as we are presently seeing - the wider renewables agenda will bring power costs down

Yeah, I mean I basically was a social democratic, social liberal Labour party. That's... pretty coherent.

No - that response of the question about why Starmer chose to announce Mandleson pre-vetting.

This isn't to say she wasn't talented - but there were major errors which would have sunk a less fortuante PM (and almost sank her!)

She did - but i don't think that without NSO she finds that coalition. It bailed out her inital errors economically and allowed her to follow policies that would build that coalition. Had she not had it there wouldn't have been the economic room

Well, that's a devastating response for the PM from Robbins.

North Sea Oil was a huge boon - and allowed the tax cuts and deregulation approach she took (which basically overcooked the ecnomy leading to the post 87 crash).

She bascially had a mental first budget, retrenched and then NSO allowed the Lawson boom, and overcooked it but was bailed out