Andrew Riley
@jontia.bsky.social
Isn't that a key concept of the UK's entire political framework? That the monarch is an arbiter with no choices? The joke being that they have a lot of powers they can use only once, because then the law would be changed?
February 10, 2026 at 7:12 AM
Isn't that a key concept of the UK's entire political framework? That the monarch is an arbiter with no choices? The joke being that they have a lot of powers they can use only once, because then the law would be changed?
Stay on the freeway?
February 9, 2026 at 5:48 PM
Stay on the freeway?
I'm getting a whole 'very nice little printing business this' vibes.
February 8, 2026 at 11:37 AM
I'm getting a whole 'very nice little printing business this' vibes.
It is not like this is a new approach though. What else is the whole choice agenda in education, other than a shift of responsibility from government to ensure schools are all good, to parents to make sure you pick the right one.
February 8, 2026 at 10:24 AM
It is not like this is a new approach though. What else is the whole choice agenda in education, other than a shift of responsibility from government to ensure schools are all good, to parents to make sure you pick the right one.
That's quite a charge.
February 8, 2026 at 9:57 AM
That's quite a charge.
He shouldn't have to sell himself. If the government he runs does good stuff and they use the machinery of government to sell that, then he looks good without having to make anything about himself.
February 7, 2026 at 6:16 PM
He shouldn't have to sell himself. If the government he runs does good stuff and they use the machinery of government to sell that, then he looks good without having to make anything about himself.
Straight line evolution of SLAPPs.
February 6, 2026 at 7:57 PM
Straight line evolution of SLAPPs.
Even Johnson didn't call an election because he became PM. He called it because he kicked 20 MPs out of his own party and couldn't pass any legislation as a minority government.
February 6, 2026 at 5:42 PM
Even Johnson didn't call an election because he became PM. He called it because he kicked 20 MPs out of his own party and couldn't pass any legislation as a minority government.
Really recommend the @ifbookspod.bsky.social podcast on the Clinton email server.
Totally fits with this blackberry sharing idea.
Totally fits with this blackberry sharing idea.
February 6, 2026 at 5:37 PM
Really recommend the @ifbookspod.bsky.social podcast on the Clinton email server.
Totally fits with this blackberry sharing idea.
Totally fits with this blackberry sharing idea.
Didn't this all come up again in the Marcus Bell Vs Johnson case?
If I recall correctly the judge threw out the case saying parliament had specifically declined to make misleading with statistical presentation an electoral offence on multiple occasions.
If I recall correctly the judge threw out the case saying parliament had specifically declined to make misleading with statistical presentation an electoral offence on multiple occasions.
February 5, 2026 at 7:16 PM
Didn't this all come up again in the Marcus Bell Vs Johnson case?
If I recall correctly the judge threw out the case saying parliament had specifically declined to make misleading with statistical presentation an electoral offence on multiple occasions.
If I recall correctly the judge threw out the case saying parliament had specifically declined to make misleading with statistical presentation an electoral offence on multiple occasions.
Doesn't fit the saviour complex. You can't point to that one thing and say see I turned it around doing that, because the output is too diffuse.
February 4, 2026 at 4:38 PM
Doesn't fit the saviour complex. You can't point to that one thing and say see I turned it around doing that, because the output is too diffuse.
I think earning closer to $10m since 2018.
Otherwise that's about $2 per trainee, which seems a bit unlikely.
Otherwise that's about $2 per trainee, which seems a bit unlikely.
February 4, 2026 at 3:49 PM
I think earning closer to $10m since 2018.
Otherwise that's about $2 per trainee, which seems a bit unlikely.
Otherwise that's about $2 per trainee, which seems a bit unlikely.
Where would each of today's parties put themselves on this scale? For reference?
February 4, 2026 at 11:02 AM
Where would each of today's parties put themselves on this scale? For reference?
Most contradictory votes seemed to flow from low interest in economic policy, but high information presentation.
You see several economic points in the bot output and one social point, but the voter clearly priorities social policy in choosing who to vote for.
You see several economic points in the bot output and one social point, but the voter clearly priorities social policy in choosing who to vote for.
February 3, 2026 at 4:49 PM
Most contradictory votes seemed to flow from low interest in economic policy, but high information presentation.
You see several economic points in the bot output and one social point, but the voter clearly priorities social policy in choosing who to vote for.
You see several economic points in the bot output and one social point, but the voter clearly priorities social policy in choosing who to vote for.
After following the bot when it was publishing it seemed clear it couldn't really capture the 'this is what I vote on' problem.
Ultimately we only have the one vote; you might have lots of views that align with one party, but really really care about something else and vote on that one point.
Ultimately we only have the one vote; you might have lots of views that align with one party, but really really care about something else and vote on that one point.
February 3, 2026 at 4:47 PM
After following the bot when it was publishing it seemed clear it couldn't really capture the 'this is what I vote on' problem.
Ultimately we only have the one vote; you might have lots of views that align with one party, but really really care about something else and vote on that one point.
Ultimately we only have the one vote; you might have lots of views that align with one party, but really really care about something else and vote on that one point.
I think the data behind it has moved. If you follow the link in the profile to the GitHub page, the links to the BES data in the FAQ are broken.
February 3, 2026 at 3:47 PM
I think the data behind it has moved. If you follow the link in the profile to the GitHub page, the links to the BES data in the FAQ are broken.
Is there a link through to the actual article rather than just a screen shot? I'm curious as to why there are more nodes in the right cluster. Are there overlaps of nodes on the left?
February 3, 2026 at 3:19 PM
Is there a link through to the actual article rather than just a screen shot? I'm curious as to why there are more nodes in the right cluster. Are there overlaps of nodes on the left?
A lot can change. But that doesn't mean it will get easier for tactical voters.
I'm in Chingford, IDS's seat. Tactical voting websites stopped offering data at the point the polling split went three ways.
The exact point that you might need that information.
There was no vibe that helped.
I'm in Chingford, IDS's seat. Tactical voting websites stopped offering data at the point the polling split went three ways.
The exact point that you might need that information.
There was no vibe that helped.
February 3, 2026 at 1:18 PM
A lot can change. But that doesn't mean it will get easier for tactical voters.
I'm in Chingford, IDS's seat. Tactical voting websites stopped offering data at the point the polling split went three ways.
The exact point that you might need that information.
There was no vibe that helped.
I'm in Chingford, IDS's seat. Tactical voting websites stopped offering data at the point the polling split went three ways.
The exact point that you might need that information.
There was no vibe that helped.
In a social media era, you'd have to be a complete lettuce to hope for that outcome.
Exact wording get out clauses do not work in the face of peer to peer information cycles. You just come off as a dishonest chancer.
Exact wording get out clauses do not work in the face of peer to peer information cycles. You just come off as a dishonest chancer.
February 3, 2026 at 1:16 PM
In a social media era, you'd have to be a complete lettuce to hope for that outcome.
Exact wording get out clauses do not work in the face of peer to peer information cycles. You just come off as a dishonest chancer.
Exact wording get out clauses do not work in the face of peer to peer information cycles. You just come off as a dishonest chancer.
The polling that we do have is already much more fragmented than in 24.
Then it was basically 'Labour unless strong local reason' now with 5 parties on 20% it is much more uncertain.
Then it was basically 'Labour unless strong local reason' now with 5 parties on 20% it is much more uncertain.
February 3, 2026 at 1:12 PM
The polling that we do have is already much more fragmented than in 24.
Then it was basically 'Labour unless strong local reason' now with 5 parties on 20% it is much more uncertain.
Then it was basically 'Labour unless strong local reason' now with 5 parties on 20% it is much more uncertain.
Estimates on how many of that 1 million owed no tax?
February 3, 2026 at 12:20 PM
Estimates on how many of that 1 million owed no tax?
It interesting to see that Income Inequality has been on the decline. But curious as to how this had actually happened and what it means in terms of real life expectations alongside the growth in student debt, house price inflation compared to incomes etc.
Can we really be see lower inequality?
Can we really be see lower inequality?
February 3, 2026 at 8:30 AM
It interesting to see that Income Inequality has been on the decline. But curious as to how this had actually happened and what it means in terms of real life expectations alongside the growth in student debt, house price inflation compared to incomes etc.
Can we really be see lower inequality?
Can we really be see lower inequality?
It won't get done if you don't get started. And starting such a process would be a story the gov could put out about reforming HoL and improving standards in public life.
Seems win, win to just get on with it.
Seems win, win to just get on with it.
February 2, 2026 at 6:44 PM
It won't get done if you don't get started. And starting such a process would be a story the gov could put out about reforming HoL and improving standards in public life.
Seems win, win to just get on with it.
Seems win, win to just get on with it.
And the reason to put "problem" in quotes is that it is just possible to legislate and fix it however you want.
That's the point of a legislature after all.
Yes it takes time and votes and organisation. But that's the job.
That's the point of a legislature after all.
Yes it takes time and votes and organisation. But that's the job.
February 2, 2026 at 6:26 PM
And the reason to put "problem" in quotes is that it is just possible to legislate and fix it however you want.
That's the point of a legislature after all.
Yes it takes time and votes and organisation. But that's the job.
That's the point of a legislature after all.
Yes it takes time and votes and organisation. But that's the job.