If we're talking about bias, why do BBC politics programmes, from Politics Live to the Laura Kuennsberg Show, still always begin with a look at the newspaper front pages, which are overwhelmingly biased in one direction. Helps frame the entire news agenda and debate in their favour

Trump is incredibly unpopular here! including amongst Tory voters. What are they doing?

This is precisely the point (and one that journalists like Joshua Rosenberg, who should know better, clearly also don't get). You do not need to apologise for speaking the truth. Journalists and broadcasters have a particular duty to *not* apologise if those they cover don't like fair coverage.

Well, why *is* it in government? It's plan seems to have started - and ended - with getting the Tories out.

The BBC should tell Trump to get stuffed and that they'll see him in court. Trump said every word he was broadcast saying - and even if he didn't say them all together, the sentiments they expressed were consistent with the rest of his actions that day. news.sky.com/story/trump-...

I suspect the Germans are a long way ahead of Brits on this one. They're certainly far ahead of the UK govt, which is still pathetically pretending that it's business as usual, rather than planning for the changed reality.

Trump: "Nobody knows what magnets are."

Good luck with that. (Not really good luck, obviously). What exactly is he going to sue over? All the quotes were true and even stitched together out of order, didn't give a misleading impression of his actions and intentions that day. But as ever, it's not about winning: it's about intimidation.

I suspect there's also a strong element here of far too many journalists and BBC managers spending too much time on X and getting a wholly misleading impression of how big a story the Trump edits were. They're excessively influenced by right-wing activist opinion, and particularly US opinion.

The BBC is hopeless at reporting on itself. The idea that a minor, if misleading, edit is the most serious crisis in its history is ludicrous self-absorption, even allowing for the context of a Faragite desire to break it. It's certainly not as serious as the Iraq-Gilligan crisis.

The BBC resignations are a massive overreaction that will only lead to more demands from the same people whenever they see something they don't like - which will be often. Or it leads to preemptive appeasement. Far from cutting out bias, it will lead to the embedding of it.

Very depressing thread. The country is regressing rapidly. I note the irony that those who are probably most paranoically afraid of Sharia law are probably also those keenest on certain aspects of it.

This is the first time Labour has finished outright fourth in a poll since July 2019 (although that time they were only 6 points off the lead). Find Out Now do routinely find lower Labour / higher Green shares than other pollsters though that doesn't necessarily make them wrong.

Even if Tesla does achieve the objectives that would trigger this payout (which he won't: Tesla has peaked as a company IMO), a payout on this scale is not about reward, it's about power. Someone worth that much can buy continents, never mind countries. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

Another record poll share for the Greens, with FON, putting them on 18%. Note Labour in fourth too. I'm a bit sceptical of these Green numbers, which you'd expect to be showing up in more local by-elections wins or near-misses than they're managing at the moment, if they were in the high teens.

It's easy to dismiss this as just a online thing - but increasingly the 'wealth tax/billionares will pay for it' is cutting through more generally You can see it on normal, non-politicos insta feeds-particularly driven by the Greens. It's hugely damaging to the leigitimacy of actual progressive tax

It's very rare for Labour Deputy Leaders to go on to the top job. Powell, however, has an excellent platform from which to play to the members while ministers are constrained by collective responsibility.

Every new economy-transforming industry or innovation invariably an asset bubble as investors pour in on vibes, greed, optimism and flawed analysis. From the South Sea, canals and railways, to the internet and AI, it's the same dynamic. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

The crucial bit of this tactical 'only Labour or Reform can win here' VI poll, though, is that Labour and Reform would be tied. Not enough Lib Dem or Green voters are (right now) prepared to tactically vote for Labour to offset the number of Tories willing to tactically vote for Reform.

This only works if: 1. People who want to stop Reform believe Labour won't do the same sort of thing. Echoing Reform's language runs directly counter to that. And 2. Labour is best-placed to Stop Reform. Being only a few points clear of both LD and Grn means that's nothing like assured.

For me, it is objectively ridiculous that the UK left knows and cares a lot more about Zohran Mamdani than it does about Pedro Sánchez - the left-wing Prime Minister of Europe's fastest growing economy.

Not just the Labour party, who are drifting aimlessly. The Tories too are willingly being pulled in Reform's wake without resistance, and even the Lib Dems - who are, rightly, more confident in their overall position - could be a lot more vocal in leading opinion.

Well, yes and no. It's true that a government wanting more control over a central bank is not, of itself, an inevitable road to chaos. However, it's also easy enough to track the record of populists in power on this score - and anyone giving Reform the benefit of the doubt is far too gullible.

It says a lot about the current state of the US that if Cheney were active now, he’d be considered quite a rational and diligent and centrist actor, too leftwing to be welcome in the Republican Party

I really don't know what the purpose of Reeves's speech today was. Confused messaging (are things really bad, needing further measures, or getting better?), no real sale line, no obvious audience the wordsoup was aimed at. Just vibes that the Budget will be ugly. www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cw...

A government *can* nationalise public services (and plenty of private ones too, should it wish). It *can* cut bills. In fact, the UK history of nationalised industries and services is of exactly that. And how do governments make the sums add up? Slash investment and watch standards plummet.

Media regulation is *way* behind where the media industry is now. Freedom of speech has to involve a degree of duty to the truth - particularly so for large-scale publishers (and nothing these days is larger scale than social media platforms).

Trump: incapable of thinking that someone else might not think as he thinks. Particularly when Trump *does* think like Putin in quite a lot of - but crucially, not all - areas.

Free passes are affordable for rich pensioners but not for young adults in education or on minimum-wage jobs. Depends on your priorities, I suppose. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

This implies legislation. The king can remove HRH, prince (I think), medals and rank but not Andrew's aristocratic titles. That needs parliament. Which begs the question what else a Bill would include. It would be sensible to remove him as a Counsellor of State and potential regent too.

After three days spent with AI researchers from around the world, one thing is very clear to me: we need the humanities and social sciences more than ever. We need philosophers to ask about ethics and responsibility. We need sociologists to understand how technology reshapes relationships, 1/

Navigating between the US and China to protect interests while avoiding too many dependencies on either yet is unlikely to be too much fun for other countries, large companies, or anyone else, but that seems likely to be the way for the coming years.

A lot of the public think that the bulk of current immigration is small boats. It's not.

It's only seven years since Apple became the first trillion dollar company. For Nvidia to be worth $5trn feels very bubble-y. You have to have a lot of faith in AI - and a lot of faith in other people's faith in AI - to believe it's justified. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

This is what I think of as the most important chart in British politics. It shows the amount people spend on retail sales and the amount they get. Compared to Feb 2022 people are spending about 16% more but consuming 4% less.

It's the 250th anniversary of the US Declaration of Independence next year. No doubt Trump will want his ballroom front and centre. For the Bicentennial, Elizabeth II did a state visit. Expect an invite for Charles III this time. Expect also the obvious joke about who the king should send instead.

I'm doubtful about "writing it into law", which is another Green 'make everything mandatory or illegal' proposal. But. Play is important and play areas are important and both local authorities and developers should do more. It's not even altruism: both benefit if people like where they live.

With Russia’s threat growing and its behavior becoming increasingly unhinged, European countries should ask themselves how many cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, strike drones, and interceptors they possess. We don’t even have a third of what’s required

YouGov report the highest *ever* vote share for the Greens. I think with a 4-way tie for second, the Greens would so better than projections say. Green votes will clump to urban left-liberal, younger constituencies. Entirely plausible that the Tories could finish *sixth* by MPs on these numbers

Hurricane Melissa is the seventh Category 5 hurricane of the 2020s, with four years to go. Only one decade (the 2000s) has seen more. There've been thirteen Cat 5s in the last ten years. Prior to the current series, the 10-year rolling record was nine. Before the 21st century, it was just six.

If Trump thinks Vought is Vader (which he's not, though Miller might be), who does that make Trump (in his own mind)?

So, what's this about? Two things. Firstly, to directly intervene in the voting process: intimidating Democrats and preventing people from voting. Secondly, and ironically given the above, to provide 'evidence' that the election was 'unfair' if/when Trump and allies lose. It won't just be CA/NJ.

Caerphilly by-election thoughts. The tl;dr version: appalling for Lab, Con, v good for Plaid, underwhelming for Ref vs expectations; excellent turnout, indicating voters perceive the need to engage. Labour screwed in May, probably in 2029 too. Thread follows.

This is entirely right. Trump hasn't worked it out yet but others no doubt have. Britain and Europe should not be reliant on Russia, the US, China or India for anything - from national security to raw materials to telecoms to financial / information infrastructure.

The BBC have made this claim repeatedly this morning, presumably because they can't be bothered doing some actual research. Henry VIII never met a pope. I don't know if any reigning* 'British' monarch has ever prayed with one before. If so, it would have been well before the 16th century.

The current line taken by some Conservatives is "We will rip up ILR, something no govt has ever done before, but citizenship is different". Not reassuring. Precedents matter. "We don't abide by rules previously agreed" is the precedent.Once that's set, reassurances on other rules carry little weight

The actual regime that these people are hankering after is Dubai: a small elite of citizens, most immigrants to be transient, insecure and all immigrants to be second-class. In reality they would hate the world they would create and would find ever-more ridiculous scapegoats for their failure.

I doubt there has ever been a US administration less capable of dealing with a major financial crisis, and few* (at most) more prone to provoking one. The world needs to keep an eye on this. *Although there is an irony in Trump lauding Andrew Jackson so highly.

Right decision. Wrong reason. Domestic league matches should never be played outside the home club's area. That undermines the entire basis of what it means to be a club, rather than a franchise brand. The proposal will return. It shouldn't. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/footba....

If *any* dependent receives *any* form of social protection at any point, you lose your legal status, as drafted. It is sloppy, mad & ludicrously extreme all at once