deleriad.bsky.social
Green social prescribing, Palliative care research at University of Edinburgh. Cats, Edinburgh, games, Babylon 5 and even more besides.
he/him
This account is for a mix of personal and professional interests
175 posts
508 followers
434 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I think the latter is hughsexual.
comment in response to
post
Hench - novel.
comment in response to
post
Third Cock From The Sun. #NaughtyASitCom
comment in response to
post
My wife and I, a humanist wedding aboard RSS Discovery in 2009.
comment in response to
post
You're not wrong there.
comment in response to
post
Same here
Wordle 1,452 6/6
🟨⬜⬜⬜⬜
⬜⬜🟨⬜🟨
⬜🟩⬜🟨🟩
🟩🟩⬜⬜🟩
⬜⬜⬜⬜⬜
🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
comment in response to
post
Don't pay the theremin. Don't even fix a price.
comment in response to
post
It was the right decision. MC has done a lot of good for the club but he came up short in the end. Could become the next Gareth Southgate.
comment in response to
post
Very distinguished.
comment in response to
post
Opus playing the "sheet game". It was no game. I have the scars to prove it.
comment in response to
post
You're not going to get anyone willing to hold a sign at a Trump rally but that's not the point. If some recant and cross over, great, welcome them, but they have to come to you, not the other way around.
comment in response to
post
Promote videos and accounts of regretful Trump voters so that it becomes normal and energise your own voters with policies that inspire them. Enough former Trump voters will stay home out of disgust about Trump that you can win on your own terms.
comment in response to
post
It's not about the people in that photo. They're lost. To win the next election we need to persuade a fairly small number of Marginal Trump voters that they didn't get what they thought they were voting for. It doesn't mean "reaching out to them" or crafting policies for them.
comment in response to
post
*Assuming, of course, that there is a next one.
comment in response to
post
If those "soft" Trump voters see scolding or anger or simply don't see the stories because people are scared to admit what they did, then we lose one pathway to changing their vote.
comment in response to
post
We can't refight the last election but we can build a narrative about the next one* and I think these kinds of stories are really helpful. I suspect that every one of these stories is likely to resonate with a "soft" Trump voter who will see themselves in those shoes.
comment in response to
post
Plenty of evidence that people assess what they think in part on what they think other people think. If it becomes accepted wisdom that Trump was worse than they thought then that can have a big impact on how they vote in the future.
comment in response to
post
I would be tempted to encourage these kinds of statements. The more we can normalise them and encourage a cascade of them, the more people can see it as normal to think they were wrong to vote the way they did.
comment in response to
post
My wife used it daily for 5 years between Roseburn-Leith. Her issues were conflicts with pedestrians in terms of free-running dogs, children and so on. It is a compromise between leisure use and commuter use. Having proper segregated on-road infra would be a lot better.
comment in response to
post
"Pleasing nobody" appears to be the entire policy for everything right now.
comment in response to
post
If Britain is an "island of strangers", that's not because of people who've raised families here, built new lives & contributed to our schools, industries & public services.
It's because of changing technologies & patterns of work, social atomisation, declining social provision & rampant inequality
comment in response to
post
Starmer doesn't seem to realise that, if you consistently accept the way your opponents frame a question, you'll find it hard to reject the answers that they give.
If you keep telling voters that Farage is right in his analysis, it will be hard to persuade them that he's wrong in his prescriptions.
comment in response to
post
He may not have intended to echo Powell's words but the minute he set out to appeal to our worst instincts about immigration for a positive headline, he jumped into a river that only goes one way. Clueless or disingenuous? Who knows but some blue labour 'strategists' think this counts as winning.
comment in response to
post
He didn't HAVE to go chasing what he must have hoped would be positive headlines in the Sun/Mail etc with his choice of words. He didn't have to pitch his words at some "blue labour" imagined concept of a mass of bigoted, immigrant-fearing working-class men. But he did.
comment in response to
post
The speech frames the policy and either through ignorance of history or deliberate choice, Starmer's speech echoes Powell's. He *chose* his words. Either he was clueless and didn't spot what his words echoed or he wasn't. Whatever, his speech is now entangled with Powell's.
comment in response to
post
I think this is missing the the wood for the trees. The most famous speech about immigration in living memory is Powell's rivers of blood. A major speech like Starmer's exists in relation to it: opposing it or supporting it, usually implicitly.
comment in response to
post
Travelling at nearly 350kmh on a train, I would have as well.