Best Of

@Benpointer
Okay, its time.

#COMPETITION

Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the House? 39

Number of net gains (or losses -ve) for the Dems in the Senate? 4

Number of MSPs won by the SNP at the Holyrood election? 50

Number of AMs won by Plaid Cymru at the Senedd election? 25

UK Party recording the largest poll lead during 2026 and by what percentage? (British Polling Council registered pollsters only). Reform 14%

Labour’s Projected National Share of the vote based on the 2026 local elections according to the BBC? 23%

Number of Reform MPs on the 31st December 2026? 7

The name of the UK Prime Minister on 31st December 2026? Starmer

Will Andy Burnham will be an MP on 31st December 2026? No

UK borrowing in the financial year to November 2026 (£132.3bn to November 2025). £142 billion

UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2026 (1.1% to October 2025). 1.1%

Winners of the 2026 FIFA Men’s World Cup. England


I think I may be the first one to suggest the last answer. For shame, for shame.

Incidentally, the Greenland agreement appears to be the creation of "Artic Sentry" by NATO.

And nothing to do with sovereign bases.

Danish Prime Minister shoots down talk of U.S. sovereign bases in Greenland 🇬🇱 and says she is open to an agreement on Greenland with the U.S. only as long as Denmark’s territorial integrity is respected.

“NATO is fully aware of the Kingdom of Denmark's position. We can negotiate on everything political; security, investments, economy. But we cannot negotiate on our sovereignty. I have been informed that this has not been the case.“
https://x.com/yarotrof/status/2014239663326675409

Yeah one side is definitely not briefing the press correctly, and I'm pretty sure it's not Denmark and Greenland.

It's not as though US conservative media gives two hoots about the truth, so that's probably not a problem.

Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again

Newsom seems to be everywhere.

No doubt he is running.

Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.

Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair.
Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65.
AOC is second on 8.6.

The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases.
AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.

Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.

There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.

They need to find someone who can appeal first of all to the swing states, to aspirational Middle America rather than the liberal woke Democrat base.

Make American California Again isn’t even a popular message in California any more, and New York is likely to be an even bigger mess by the time 2028 comes around.

Too many Dems are still going on about illegal immigration and gender stuff that are 80-20 issues against them. Trump and the GOP are pretty good at finding these things and making the Dems look stupid by reflexively opposing them. This month they appear to be in favour of NGO fraud and against voter ID because it’s racist. Black people in general really don’t think it’s racist, and think it’s insulting that it’s even mentioned in this way.

Kelly is worth a long shot bet. Newsom and Buttigieg lead polls now though for the Democratic nomination and Buttigieg is likely to do best in early states. Harris also polls well but losing nominees who have never been President are rarely nominated again

Newsom seems to be everywhere.

No doubt he is running.

Buttigieg has the repeated problem of the later states and their demographics.

Buttigieg isn't second favourite for the nomination. He's way out at 19.5 on Betfair.
Newsom is clear favourite on 2.65.
AOC is second on 8.6.

The dream ticket is Newsom with AOC as his VP. That covers all the bases.
AOC is very young and can wait eight years for the presidency, and use that time to prove herself.

Newsom-AOC risks scaring the horses with a population pissed off by Trump but still very wary of the Dems.

There is a real risk that ticket makes the same mistakes Harris made in 2024. The Dems have to earn a lot of respect again.

They need to find someone who can appeal first of all to the swing states, to aspirational Middle America rather than the liberal woke Democrat base.

Make American California Again isn’t even a popular message in California any more, and New York is likely to be an even bigger mess by the time 2028 comes around.

Too many Dems are still going on about illegal immigration and gender stuff that are 80-20 issues against them. Trump and the GOP are pretty good at finding these things and making the Dems look stupid by reflexively opposing them. This month they appear to be in favour of NGO fraud and against voter ID because it’s racist. Black people in general really don’t think it’s racist, and think it’s insulting that it’s even mentioned in this way.

Biden, without the senility, is what the Democrats need. Someone who gets middle America well enough to get a hearing. Who recognises the importance of manufacturing and investment there. Who is not obsessed with gender, race or equality. Who is focused like a laser on the economy and the standard of living of the average American. I am not persuaded Newsom is that man and AOC is not that woman. She would be a drag on the ticket where it matters even if she boosted the vote where it doesn't.

I would like to see Buttigieg on the ticket as VP but I think having him head it would be giving the Republicans a chance and after foisting Trump on the US and the world they don't deserve one.

Conservative amendment on social media ban for under 16s backed by the Lords - 261 - 150

Disgracefully authoritarian.

Nanny state Tories. Where will it end?

It is certainly a topic of conversation with our children who really struggle with their children's [16, 14, and 13] phone use both in school and elsewhere

It is very much backed by them and childrens mental health charities

So no benefits of learning and communication get lost?

And there’s no other options to investigate and try first?

It will all be in the detail

Wrong footing government and showing you are leading on the popular agenda from opposition, and actually achieving things, is exactly what is needed from opposition.

Wrong footing government and showing you are leading on the popular agenda from opposition, and actually achieving things… by doing away with investigations and any consideration of inherent vice, without bothering with pilots schemes, without observing what happens in Australia as time passes, just diving straight in based on seeing something on morning television and told is hugely popular in voodoo polls, is exactly THE WRONG WAY to show you are ready again for power.

Do you see my point?

No

I followed it closely when proposed, argued and introduced in Australia. I can tell you the key piece of detail straight away - it’s not a ban on under sixteens having access to phones, devices or internet use - it’s merely a ban on platforms giving under sixteens accounts. The rest is still parenting.

So where some children will have better quality of life, better quality education and self learning, other children will be deprived this, so I liken it to those parents who banned Rock n Roll in the house, believing they were doing good. Banning Rock n Roll was actual bizarre, bad parenting.

And the real kicker here is the actual problem - predatory and addictive algorithms - problem applies to everyone, all ages, not just children. Where is the actual policy needed?

The actual policy needed is to ban algorithms. But politics is the art of the possible. Start with under 16 and move from there.