Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Recent events - such as Covid or Ukraine - lead to an important question: are our leader's (or prospective leader's) instincts good? In a crisis where information is limited, are they tempted to make rapid 'good' or 'poor' decisions?
I fear Starmer might be a little too lawyerly for 'good' instincts: delaying things in a crisis can be the same as making no decisions. It'd be interesting to see how he could have dealt with Covid and Ukraine compared to Boris.
There’s an interesting distinction that’s developed between Poland (populist regime, but sound on Putin; basically pro-Western) and Hungary (populist regime; Putin apologists).
There was some rumour that Orban had his eye on a sliver of Ukraine (Transcarpathia) in the event of any carve-up, although the chance of that looks slim now.
Regarding Kelensky’s tweet above, I’m surprised he didn’t mention Italy. And I’m not sure what Ireland have done or not done to earn his ire.
For historical reasons, Polish nationalists and Russian nationalists have always disliked each other. Hungarian nationalism has basically come down to whatever Orban thinks. There's a good summary of Hungarian politics here:
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
"Vote Starmer: He'll Do" isn't a normal electoral pitch, but against Johnson (or a post-Johnson mini-Johnson), it might just work.
It seems to me that post-Johnson (to be honest I am sure Johnson will lead the Tories into the next GE), it will either be onwards to the right and somebody hardline like Patel or they drift back to the centre.
But have they got anyone of the centre who is any good and would win the membership? Rishi is dead.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
What is the point in conversing with you when you don't address the point I actually made?
By your own definition, Johnson isn't inspiring yet I've never heard you say that. Didn't you vote for him?
Starmer doesn't need to be inspiring, he just needs to be better than Johnson, which he is. And to lead on the economy as an opposition is how you win an election.
Since Rishi is off the table, who do you want to take over?
If you don't feel like you can answer these questions, I'll leave our chat here.
I have criticised Boris constantly and no I did not vote for him in the member election for leader
I have openly criticised Rishi for not helping the lower paid and those on benefits, but when Boris goes he will be in the mix for new leader
I am not a member of the conservative party but will rejoin when Boris stands down and I will support whoever the conservative mps and the membership choose as his successor
I would also comment that neither of us can predict the next GE which could be as late as January 2025, but you want Labour to win and of course you will cheer them on, why wouldn't you
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
I think we all agree Starmer is uninspiring.
What is vexatious about Big G is that we all know that if Starmer *was* inspiring, he’d be moaning that he was “too woke”, or “soft on Brexit, or “not doing enough about backbench radicals”.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
Fed up with West’s diplomatic fence sitting, Zelensky goes on offensive: tells Europe leaders they acted too late to stop RF invasion. Singles out nations for being late or reluctant to take measures - Germany, Portugal & Ireland - then lambasts Hungary for neutrality #Ukraine
Fed up with West’s diplomatic fence sitting, Zelensky goes on offensive: tells Europe leaders they acted too late to stop RF invasion. Singles out nations for being late or reluctant to take measures - Germany, Portugal & Ireland - then lambasts Hungary for neutrality #Ukraine
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
What is the point in conversing with you when you don't address the point I actually made?
By your own definition, Johnson isn't inspiring yet I've never heard you say that. Didn't you vote for him?
Starmer doesn't need to be inspiring, he just needs to be better than Johnson, which he is. And to lead on the economy as an opposition is how you win an election.
Since Rishi is off the table, who do you want to take over?
If you don't feel like you can answer these questions, I'll leave our chat here.
I have criticised Boris constantly and no I did not vote for him in the member election for leader
I have openly criticised Rishi for not helping the lower paid and those on benefits, but when Boris goes he will be in the mix for new leader
I am not a member of the conservative party but will rejoin when Boris stands down and I will support whoever the conservative mps and the membership choose as his successor
I would also comment that neither of us can predict the next GE which could be as late as January 2025, but you want Labour to win and of course you will cheer them on, why wouldn't you
And you will cheer the Tories on, at least I don't pretend to not be pro-Labour/left-wing.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
I think we all agree Starmer is uninspiring.
What is vexatious about Big G is that we all know that if Starmer *was* inspiring, he’d be moaning that he was “too woke”, or “soft on Brexit, or “not doing enough about backbench radicals”.
He is the king of Whataboutery.
Big G seems to think we're all a bit thick, like we can't see that he's pro-Tory. I don't know why he doesn't just own it.
Dearie me, BBC News have misplaced their customary fawning tone on the Rasta Royals & their Carribean jaunt: 'overtones of privilege and separation' in Jamaica. Still, things back on track for their Duke of Windsor commemorative visit to the Bahamas, the joy was inescapable apparently.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
What is the point in conversing with you when you don't address the point I actually made?
By your own definition, Johnson isn't inspiring yet I've never heard you say that. Didn't you vote for him?
Starmer doesn't need to be inspiring, he just needs to be better than Johnson, which he is. And to lead on the economy as an opposition is how you win an election.
Since Rishi is off the table, who do you want to take over?
If you don't feel like you can answer these questions, I'll leave our chat here.
I have criticised Boris constantly and no I did not vote for him in the member election for leader
I have openly criticised Rishi for not helping the lower paid and those on benefits, but when Boris goes he will be in the mix for new leader
I am not a member of the conservative party but will rejoin when Boris stands down and I will support whoever the conservative mps and the membership choose as his successor
I would also comment that neither of us can predict the next GE which could be as late as January 2025, but you want Labour to win and of course you will cheer them on, why wouldn't you
And you will cheer the Tories on, at least I don't pretend to not be pro-Labour/left-wing.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Surely few are inspired by Johnson either. GE19, ok, reasons, but a person would need to be stunningly dense or disinterested to have not seen through him by now.
How do historical examples of being reliant on trade with countries we go to war with reflect on todays situation, any lessons to be learnt?
We were reasonably close to German industry, who were dominant in quite of lot of markets weren’t they, in lead up to First World War? The UK establishment quite close to Germans leading up to 2nd world war, Were there also arguments about dirty money and it’s influence when we were at war with Germany, Italy and Japan?
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
What is the point in conversing with you when you don't address the point I actually made?
By your own definition, Johnson isn't inspiring yet I've never heard you say that. Didn't you vote for him?
Starmer doesn't need to be inspiring, he just needs to be better than Johnson, which he is. And to lead on the economy as an opposition is how you win an election.
Since Rishi is off the table, who do you want to take over?
If you don't feel like you can answer these questions, I'll leave our chat here.
I have criticised Boris constantly and no I did not vote for him in the member election for leader
I have openly criticised Rishi for not helping the lower paid and those on benefits, but when Boris goes he will be in the mix for new leader
I am not a member of the conservative party but will rejoin when Boris stands down and I will support whoever the conservative mps and the membership choose as his successor
I would also comment that neither of us can predict the next GE which could be as late as January 2025, but you want Labour to win and of course you will cheer them on, why wouldn't you
And you will cheer the Tories on, at least I don't pretend to not be pro-Labour/left-wing.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Neither was Attlee, though facsimile Clement vs parody Winston will be an interesting reprise of 1945. Where Attlee got it right was in assembling a strong and talented team around himself, and acting as chair of cabinet rather than a wannabee President.
It was a different, more collective approach. This version of the Shadow cabinet is looking a lot more heavyweight. I thought Reeves did an excellent job on Wednesday for example. The jigsaw is not yet complete, but getting there.
Sadly serious divisions becoming apparent in the EU
I don’t think it’s sudden news that Orban is a problem.
No, but it was perhaps hoped that a Russian invasion might provoke a sea change in attitudes across the continent. And end to complacency, and cosying up. It does not seem so.
I think that analysis is rather premature, even if it is the instinctive view of armchair generals in Britain to sniff out continental treachery.
I'd give that more credence without the 'armchair general' crack which still makes no sense to me. Anyone commenting who is not there on the ground is an armchair general. And my point wasn't about continental treachery, is was about everyone, us included, not necessarily making as long term singificant a change re Russia as we might currently think we are.
I'll have you know I'm an armchair lance corporal. I know my place.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I voted for Blair and despite being attacked for being anti labour my recent posts have made it clear that my GE24 vote will be entirely judged on the policies of the two main parties
Sadly serious divisions becoming apparent in the EU
I don’t think it’s sudden news that Orban is a problem.
No, but it was perhaps hoped that a Russian invasion might provoke a sea change in attitudes across the continent. And end to complacency, and cosying up. It does not seem so.
I think that analysis is rather premature, even if it is the instinctive view of armchair generals in Britain to sniff out continental treachery.
I'd give that more credence without the 'armchair general' crack which still makes no sense to me. Anyone commenting who is not there on the ground is an armchair general. And my point wasn't about continental treachery, is was about everyone, us included, not necessarily making as long term singificant a change re Russia as we might currently think we are.
I'll have you know I'm an armchair lance corporal. I know my place.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I voted for Blair and despite being attacked for being anti labour my recent posts have made it clear that my GE24 vote will be entirely judged on the policies of the two main parties
Sadly serious divisions becoming apparent in the EU
I don’t think it’s sudden news that Orban is a problem.
No, but it was perhaps hoped that a Russian invasion might provoke a sea change in attitudes across the continent. And end to complacency, and cosying up. It does not seem so.
I think that analysis is rather premature, even if it is the instinctive view of armchair generals in Britain to sniff out continental treachery.
I'd give that more credence without the 'armchair general' crack which still makes no sense to me. Anyone commenting who is not there on the ground is an armchair general. And my point wasn't about continental treachery, is was about everyone, us included, not necessarily making as long term singificant a change re Russia as we might currently think we are.
I'll have you know I'm an armchair lance corporal. I know my place.
I'm an armchair orderly on latrine duty!
So an Armchair Commode-or?
Yes, well, the stuff he has to shovel from folk on here at times.
Sadly, the sanctions, most of them anyway will be lifted very quickly, Germany and others need Russian gas, and other commodity's in significant quantity's to stop price rises and reception, France and a few others don't what sanctions to get it the way of there business, and will largely ignore or work around them, and fairly quickly other companies and contrary's will be saying why are we missing out on business. Some sanctions e.g. on top grade computer chips might remain but china and black market middle men will get enough to Russia. some of the big Yauts might stay frozen as symbols that we are still sanctioning but not much more than that.
Germany and others will spend a touch more on military this year and maybe next, but the 100 million will be delayed and then forgotten, not that it would have done much anyway, Germany has now after 3 weeks run out of kit they can send to Ukraine, apparently, because they have very lintel usable spare kit.
Ukraine will largely feel abandoned by the west, sad that after being so brave they still had to concede so much to Russia, traumatised by the fighting and all the death. and still have shattered infastucher,
Russia will still have been able to expand its territory in an unprovoked war, yes his men did not do well, but his people at home don't know/believe that, to them he looks like a hero. his army will learn lessons, and be able to make better weapons have better combat based tuning. and will be stronger next time. He has lost a lot of men, but Putin does not care, most of the equipment he has lost was old or not very good. Putin now has stronger control of Russia than he has ever had, with his control over the media, 15,000 of his opponents in prison, and many 100,000s more who have self exiled.
And today he has still proved Putin can still stock internal division in the West by mentioning JK Rolling. and he still has a big bargaining chip in the form of the 402,000 civilians he has deported form Mariupol and other places.
I hope I am wrong, and we still don't know, But I think Putin/authoritarian strongmen have won, and the west/freedom/democracy has lost. outside Europe North America, NZ, Australia South Korea and Japan. support has been thin on the ground for Ukraine, yes most nations voted one way in the UN, but not all and many abstained, others only did so with prodding and because they know it amounted to nothing. there does not seem even a willingness to explode Russia from the next G20 meeting.
all very sad, we as in the west had a window of opportunity to arm Ukraine to the max in the first week, MiG 29s, from Poland, S-300 from Slovakia, anti ship missiles for Odesa, or maybe land lunched torpedo's. and we could have sent enough uniforms, guns mortars, and so on for a 2 million army.
I think German rearming happens whatever - simply because of how embarrassed Germany has been by the preparedness of its forces. There's a piece in the NYTimes looking at their regiment in Lithuania, and how poorly equipped it is compared to British/Polish/Lithuanian forces.
I don't disagree with your other points: I think that much of Continental Europe would be happy with Putin to return to the pre-Feb 22 borders, and the oil and gas to start flowing again.
A better outcome for everyone - including the Russians themselves - is regime change. A new leader would (I'm sure) be very happy to walk back Putin's mistakes, because it is in Russia's interests.
If the West hangs together, and is willing to continue to back Ukraine, then I think we can achieve this. And Putin may well conspire to help us: simply he'll be desperate to show some gain (i.e. Mauripol and the coast), and I don't think that'll be sufficient.
There’s an interesting distinction that’s developed between Poland (populist regime, but sound on Putin; basically pro-Western) and Hungary (populist regime; Putin apologists).
There was some rumour that Orban had his eye on a sliver of Ukraine (Transcarpathia) in the event of any carve-up, although the chance of that looks slim now.
Regarding Kelensky’s tweet above, I’m surprised he didn’t mention Italy. And I’m not sure what Ireland have done or not done to earn his ire.
For historical reasons, Polish nationalists and Russian nationalists have always disliked each other. Hungarian nationalism has basically come down to whatever Orban thinks. There's a good summary of Hungarian politics here:
Being Pro-Putin doesn't seem to have hurt Orban. It may not harm Le Pen or Melenchon either. I hope that popular support for Ukraine is not as ephemeral as it was for Syrian refugees.
I’ve expected a minority Labour government for around a year now.
Boris’s Ukraine bounce has been insipid, and his economic policy is in tatters. That’s besides the lingering odour left by partygate etc.
Levelling Up is dead, in fact it was never born. Brexit is just a problem now to be managed away, even village idiots no longer believe it offers anything material. Boris is weak on crime, weak on the Union, and health and education services are both struggling.
Keir is boring, but with Reeves, Streeting, Nandy, Lammy, Phillipson and Cooper he has the most credible support team we’ve seen since 2010. The Lib Dems can be relied upon to hurt the Tories in the more sandal-wearing shires.
All that remains is some decent policy, which Keir is far too shrewd to let drop until the eve of the election.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I voted for Blair and despite being attacked for being anti labour my recent posts have made it clear that my GE24 vote will be entirely judged on the policies of the two main parties
ROFL, you won't vote Labour.
You are just wrong
The simple request is show me your policies so I can judge them and if Labour have the best policies, just like I did for Blair, I could vote labour
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I voted for Blair and despite being attacked for being anti labour my recent posts have made it clear that my GE24 vote will be entirely judged on the policies of the two main parties
ROFL, you won't vote Labour.
You are just wrong
The simple request is show me your policies so I can judge them and if Labour have the best policies, just like Idid twice for Blair, I could vote labour
Fed up with West’s diplomatic fence sitting, Zelensky goes on offensive: tells Europe leaders they acted too late to stop RF invasion. Singles out nations for being late or reluctant to take measures - Germany, Portugal & Ireland - then lambasts Hungary for neutrality #Ukraine
But! But! But! Boris was embarrassed in a selectively edited clip of a NATO photo-op! Don’t you get what’s important?
Not to ignore, at a time of crisis like this, show of unity important, the sensible thing would have been to have given Boris a seat to hear Biden’s address to EU. They deliberately excluded Boris from the room in a sulk over a pro Brexit speech Boris gave last week.
Of greater consequence than this war may bethe sudden massive spike in us treasury yields this past 2 weeks suggesting much faster interest rate hikes
Do we need to copy though. US already talking about half point each time to the magic 2.4 figure. Do we have a similar figure to stop at or similar reasons to rush?
Sadly, the sanctions, most of them anyway will be lifted very quickly, Germany and others need Russian gas, and other commodity's in significant quantity's to stop price rises and reception, France and a few others don't what sanctions to get it the way of there business, and will largely ignore or work around them, and fairly quickly other companies and contrary's will be saying why are we missing out on business. Some sanctions e.g. on top grade computer chips might remain but china and black market middle men will get enough to Russia. some of the big Yauts might stay frozen as symbols that we are still sanctioning but not much more than that.
Germany and others will spend a touch more on military this year and maybe next, but the 100 million will be delayed and then forgotten, not that it would have done much anyway, Germany has now after 3 weeks run out of kit they can send to Ukraine, apparently, because they have very lintel usable spare kit.
Ukraine will largely feel abandoned by the west, sad that after being so brave they still had to concede so much to Russia, traumatised by the fighting and all the death. and still have shattered infastucher,
Russia will still have been able to expand its territory in an unprovoked war, yes his men did not do well, but his people at home don't know/believe that, to them he looks like a hero. his army will learn lessons, and be able to make better weapons have better combat based tuning. and will be stronger next time. He has lost a lot of men, but Putin does not care, most of the equipment he has lost was old or not very good. Putin now has stronger control of Russia than he has ever had, with his control over the media, 15,000 of his opponents in prison, and many 100,000s more who have self exiled.
And today he has still proved Putin can still stock internal division in the West by mentioning JK Rolling. and he still has a big bargaining chip in the form of the 402,000 civilians he has deported form Mariupol and other places.
I hope I am wrong, and we still don't know, But I think Putin/authoritarian strongmen have won, and the west/freedom/democracy has lost. outside Europe North America, NZ, Australia South Korea and Japan. support has been thin on the ground for Ukraine, yes most nations voted one way in the UN, but not all and many abstained, others only did so with prodding and because they know it amounted to nothing. there does not seem even a willingness to explode Russia from the next G20 meeting.
all very sad, we as in the west had a window of opportunity to arm Ukraine to the max in the first week, MiG 29s, from Poland, S-300 from Slovakia, anti ship missiles for Odesa, or maybe land lunched torpedo's. and we could have sent enough uniforms, guns mortars, and so on for a 2 million army.
I think German rearming happens whatever - simply because of how embarrassed Germany has been by the preparedness of its forces. There's a piece in the NYTimes looking at their regiment in Lithuania, and how poorly equipped it is compared to British/Polish/Lithuanian forces.
I don't disagree with your other points: I think that much of Continental Europe would be happy with Putin to return to the pre-Feb 22 borders, and the oil and gas to start flowing again.
A better outcome for everyone - including the Russians themselves - is regime change. A new leader would (I'm sure) be very happy to walk back Putin's mistakes, because it is in Russia's interests.
If the West hangs together, and is willing to continue to back Ukraine, then I think we can achieve this. And Putin may well conspire to help us: simply he'll be desperate to show some gain (i.e. Mauripol and the coast), and I don't think that'll be sufficient.
I think a big chunk of Germany’s budget is going to have to be spent on training their trainers. Considering their best company trained the Russians it doesn’t look like there is any point in buying kit if they don’t know what to do with it when they have it.
Unless it was a giant trolling effort by the Germans - “yes Russian soldiers, best plan is to group tanks and infantry tight together on main roads surrounded by woodland”…. The best German joke since, well, ever.
Sadly serious divisions becoming apparent in the EU
I don’t think it’s sudden news that Orban is a problem.
No, but it was perhaps hoped that a Russian invasion might provoke a sea change in attitudes across the continent. And end to complacency, and cosying up. It does not seem so.
I think that analysis is rather premature, even if it is the instinctive view of armchair generals in Britain to sniff out continental treachery.
I'd give that more credence without the 'armchair general' crack which still makes no sense to me. Anyone commenting who is not there on the ground is an armchair general. And my point wasn't about continental treachery, is was about everyone, us included, not necessarily making as long term singificant a change re Russia as we might currently think we are.
I'll have you know I'm an armchair lance corporal. I know my place.
I'm an armchair orderly on latrine duty!
So an Armchair Commode-or?
Yes, well, the stuff he has to shovel from folk on here at times.
Still, at at least a lot of folk whiten their own sepulchres.
The contrast between Macron and Johnson couldn't be more stark. I'd love to see a Brexit poll in the UK. If there are any Leavers still prepared to admit to their stupidity I'd be surprised.
Folk can be very forgetful.
I knew registered voters with two properties, one in the Vale of Glamorgan and one in Cardiff North. A Conservative activist in the Vale, he considered himself and his now ex-wife worthy of their two votes.
Maybe similarly, Andrea had two votes in the EU Ref. Mind you not voting at all would have expended less effort and achieved the same result.
"Why don't you want this country to succeed? No abuse or ridiculous answers."
Quite a cute debating style!
It is the last refuge of a Brexiteer scoundrel accusing former Remainers that they are revelling in "the I told you so" shortcomings of Brexit. I have moved on, but I do feel more disappointed than relieved that I was right.
Indeed. It's the pits.
God, we really got some 'Benny Hill' from our man at the leaders summit, didn't we? He still has it. Utter shambles and impossible to take your eyes off him.
The aimlessly wandering around with his hands in his pocket pretending to be Billy No Mates at NATO was top old school comedy gold.
Unless anyone can find a source to say otherwise, the casualty number for the Mariupol Theatre strike currently stands at zero. 130 people are said to have emerged unharmed, and the 'thousands' sheltering in the basement appear not to have been there at all. That's 3 for the hospital atrocity and none for the theatre atrocity. This is what I mean when I say 'the truth lies somewhere in the middle'.
I didn't realise that the Russian General Ukraine claimed to have killed today was said to have been killed on the edge of Kherson. Can Ukraine retake the city?
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I voted for Blair and despite being attacked for being anti labour my recent posts have made it clear that my GE24 vote will be entirely judged on the policies of the two main parties
ROFL, you won't vote Labour.
You are just wrong
The simple request is show me your policies so I can judge them and if Labour have the best policies, just like Idid twice for Blair, I could vote labour
You won't though. And we both know it.
1997 and 2001
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I voted for Blair and despite being attacked for being anti labour my recent posts have made it clear that my GE24 vote will be entirely judged on the policies of the two main parties
ROFL, you won't vote Labour.
You are just wrong
The simple request is show me your policies so I can judge them and if Labour have the best policies, just like Idid twice for Blair, I could vote labour
You won't though. And we both know it.
1997 and 2001
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
I do understand that - but it is people that would actually vote Labour who Labour needs, not people that pretend on forums.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I showed my Politics group this video of Blair today.
Watching that (I described him as 'looking like Elrond after he'd had a few') it was really eerie to remember him in his pomp 25 years ago. Because although I never liked the man, there is no doubt he was a rare political talent and a truly formidable operator. He didn't really come across that way, although he made a few shrewd points.
I suppose it's easier to be brilliant when you don't have a record to live up to.
(It was also slightly ironic that he talked about the SNP governing without an opposition and getting away with behaving like an opposition as a result.)
Fed up with West’s diplomatic fence sitting, Zelensky goes on offensive: tells Europe leaders they acted too late to stop RF invasion. Singles out nations for being late or reluctant to take measures - Germany, Portugal & Ireland - then lambasts Hungary for neutrality #Ukraine
Where should Britain be in all this? There were some worrying noises earlier that Biden was trying to pressure Zelenskyy into a deal. That's surprising to me unless he really is spooked about Putin's nuclear intentions but I think we should be saying AGAIN AND AGAIN that the United Kingdom remains committed to the principles of the Budapest memorandum. The defence of Ukraine's territorial integrity in return for it giving up its nuclear weapons. Firstly it helps remind the world of the seriousness with which we treat nuclear proliferation and the awful precedent that is set in a country acquiring territory by force. Secondly we make it clear that we are a country that keeps its promises. Now I know that we haven't always been consistent on that over the years. No country is. But we can at least make an effort. I liked the fact that this was Starmer's focus in his article for the Telegraph.
Britain lost an empire but has not found a role. I don't think that's quite true. Our job is to keep the western alliance together. Make sure the US remains interested in Europe and Europe remains committed to an alliance with the US. There are forces on both sides that can pull it apart.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I voted for Blair and despite being attacked for being anti labour my recent posts have made it clear that my GE24 vote will be entirely judged on the policies of the two main parties
ROFL, you won't vote Labour.
You are just wrong
The simple request is show me your policies so I can judge them and if Labour have the best policies, just like Idid twice for Blair, I could vote labour
You won't though. And we both know it.
Maybe you are right. Perhaps he's just looking for the excuse to use to justify another vote for the Tories.
However, if he'd tell a pollster today that he doesn't know how he will vote then the question is whether all the other GE2019 Tory voters who say the same will do likewise.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I voted for Blair and despite being attacked for being anti labour my recent posts have made it clear that my GE24 vote will be entirely judged on the policies of the two main parties
ROFL, you won't vote Labour.
You are just wrong
The simple request is show me your policies so I can judge them and if Labour have the best policies, just like Idid twice for Blair, I could vote labour
You won't though. And we both know it.
Maybe you are right. Perhaps he's just looking for the excuse to use to justify another vote for the Tories.
However, if he'd tell a pollster today that he doesn't know how he will vote then the question is whether all the other GE2019 Tory voters who say the same will do likewise.
I didn't realise that the Russian General Ukraine claimed to have killed today was said to have been killed on the edge of Kherson. Can Ukraine retake the city?
U.S Defense Officials are reporting that Russian Forces have begun to Lose Control of the Southern Ukrainian City of Kherson after Ukrainian Offensives began yesterday, Ukrainian Para-Military and Military Forces are Claimed to be advancing on the City from Multiple Directions.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I showed my Politics group this video of Blair today.
Watching that (I described him as 'looking like Elrond after he'd had a few') it was really eerie to remember him in his pomp 25 years ago. Because although I never liked the man, there is no doubt he was a rare political talent and a truly formidable operator. He didn't really come across that way, although he made a few shrewd points.
I suppose it's easier to be brilliant when you don't have a record to live up to.
(It was also slightly ironic that he talked about the SNP governing without an opposition and getting away with behaving like an opposition as a result.)
That's odd. What did he think SLAB and Scons, not to mention the odd LD, do for their keep?
He's too intelligent to fall into the PBTory trap of equating a minority party with one-party rule.
Sadly serious divisions becoming apparent in the EU
I don’t think it’s sudden news that Orban is a problem.
No, but it was perhaps hoped that a Russian invasion might provoke a sea change in attitudes across the continent. And end to complacency, and cosying up. It does not seem so.
I think that analysis is rather premature, even if it is the instinctive view of armchair generals in Britain to sniff out continental treachery.
I'd give that more credence without the 'armchair general' crack which still makes no sense to me. Anyone commenting who is not there on the ground is an armchair general. And my point wasn't about continental treachery, is was about everyone, us included, not necessarily making as long term singificant a change re Russia as we might currently think we are.
I'll have you know I'm an armchair lance corporal. I know my place.
I'm an armchair orderly on latrine duty!
So an Armchair Commode-or?
Yes, well, the stuff he has to shovel from folk on here at times.
Still, at at least a lot of folk whiten their own sepulchres.
Like the gannet shite on Ailsa Craig/Bass Rock (take your pick)?
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I showed my Politics group this video of Blair today.
Watching that (I described him as 'looking like Elrond after he'd had a few') it was really eerie to remember him in his pomp 25 years ago. Because although I never liked the man, there is no doubt he was a rare political talent and a truly formidable operator. He didn't really come across that way, although he made a few shrewd points.
I suppose it's easier to be brilliant when you don't have a record to live up to.
(It was also slightly ironic that he talked about the SNP governing without an opposition and getting away with behaving like an opposition as a result.)
That's odd. What did he think SLAB and Scons, not to mention the odd LD, do for their keep?
He's too intelligent to fall into the PBTory trap of equating a minority party with one-party rule.
I didn't really understand him clearly, but I think he was saying that the Tories had been hopeless as an opposition and as a result let the SNP get away with metaphorical murder as a government.
Well, he should know, of course.
The fact that he considers Anas Sarwar an exceptionally gifted politician will earn him undying mocking from Malc, of course.
I didn't realise that the Russian General Ukraine claimed to have killed today was said to have been killed on the edge of Kherson. Can Ukraine retake the city?
If the Ukrainians can find a way to break into that central portion, the Russian defensive positions will be pointing the wrong way....
The finest intelligence gathering combined with the finest military minds will be working out the way to bring that about. Taking a vast number of Russian prisoners of war is probably the only way the Ukrainians get their people back form being dispersed across Russia. And probably the best way to get rid of Putin as having created a national disgrace.
For the first time in weeks, the Pentagon assessed today that Kherson, a port city in southern Ukraine, is no longer under full Russian control.
"It doesn't appear to be as solidly in Russian control as it was before,” the senior defense official said. “Ukrainians are trying to take Kherson back and we would argue that Kherson is actually contested territory again."
I didn't realise that the Russian General Ukraine claimed to have killed today was said to have been killed on the edge of Kherson. Can Ukraine retake the city?
U.S Defense Officials are reporting that Russian Forces have begun to Lose Control of the Southern Ukrainian City of Kherson after Ukrainian Offensives began yesterday, Ukrainian Para-Military and Military Forces are Claimed to be advancing on the City from Multiple Directions.
its possible that because its not part of the areas that Russia looks to want to gain/keep they are now pulling some troops out of the area or at least not reinforcing/sending replacements. so it could still fit in to there overall stratagem.
Sadly, the sanctions, most of them anyway will be lifted very quickly, Germany and others need Russian gas, and other commodity's in significant quantity's to stop price rises and reception, France and a few others don't what sanctions to get it the way of there business, and will largely ignore or work around them, and fairly quickly other companies and contrary's will be saying why are we missing out on business. Some sanctions e.g. on top grade computer chips might remain but china and black market middle men will get enough to Russia. some of the big Yauts might stay frozen as symbols that we are still sanctioning but not much more than that.
Germany and others will spend a touch more on military this year and maybe next, but the 100 million will be delayed and then forgotten, not that it would have done much anyway, Germany has now after 3 weeks run out of kit they can send to Ukraine, apparently, because they have very lintel usable spare kit.
Ukraine will largely feel abandoned by the west, sad that after being so brave they still had to concede so much to Russia, traumatised by the fighting and all the death. and still have shattered infastucher,
Russia will still have been able to expand its territory in an unprovoked war, yes his men did not do well, but his people at home don't know/believe that, to them he looks like a hero. his army will learn lessons, and be able to make better weapons have better combat based tuning. and will be stronger next time. He has lost a lot of men, but Putin does not care, most of the equipment he has lost was old or not very good. Putin now has stronger control of Russia than he has ever had, with his control over the media, 15,000 of his opponents in prison, and many 100,000s more who have self exiled.
And today he has still proved Putin can still stock internal division in the West by mentioning JK Rolling. and he still has a big bargaining chip in the form of the 402,000 civilians he has deported form Mariupol and other places.
I hope I am wrong, and we still don't know, But I think Putin/authoritarian strongmen have won, and the west/freedom/democracy has lost. outside Europe North America, NZ, Australia South Korea and Japan. support has been thin on the ground for Ukraine, yes most nations voted one way in the UN, but not all and many abstained, others only did so with prodding and because they know it amounted to nothing. there does not seem even a willingness to explode Russia from the next G20 meeting.
all very sad, we as in the west had a window of opportunity to arm Ukraine to the max in the first week, MiG 29s, from Poland, S-300 from Slovakia, anti ship missiles for Odesa, or maybe land lunched torpedo's. and we could have sent enough uniforms, guns mortars, and so on for a 2 million army.
I think German rearming happens whatever - simply because of how embarrassed Germany has been by the preparedness of its forces. There's a piece in the NYTimes looking at their regiment in Lithuania, and how poorly equipped it is compared to British/Polish/Lithuanian forces.
I don't disagree with your other points: I think that much of Continental Europe would be happy with Putin to return to the pre-Feb 22 borders, and the oil and gas to start flowing again.
A better outcome for everyone - including the Russians themselves - is regime change. A new leader would (I'm sure) be very happy to walk back Putin's mistakes, because it is in Russia's interests.
If the West hangs together, and is willing to continue to back Ukraine, then I think we can achieve this. And Putin may well conspire to help us: simply he'll be desperate to show some gain (i.e. Mauripol and the coast), and I don't think that'll be sufficient.
I think a big chunk of Germany’s budget is going to have to be spent on training their trainers. Considering their best company trained the Russians it doesn’t look like there is any point in buying kit if they don’t know what to do with it when they have it.
Unless it was a giant trolling effort by the Germans - “yes Russian soldiers, best plan is to group tanks and infantry tight together on main roads surrounded by woodland”…. The best German joke since, well, ever.
I don't know whether training is the issue - I think it is simply that the Germans haven't bought any new kit for twenty years and none of their tanks even work.
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I showed my Politics group this video of Blair today.
Watching that (I described him as 'looking like Elrond after he'd had a few') it was really eerie to remember him in his pomp 25 years ago. Because although I never liked the man, there is no doubt he was a rare political talent and a truly formidable operator. He didn't really come across that way, although he made a few shrewd points.
I suppose it's easier to be brilliant when you don't have a record to live up to.
(It was also slightly ironic that he talked about the SNP governing without an opposition and getting away with behaving like an opposition as a result.)
That's odd. What did he think SLAB and Scons, not to mention the odd LD, do for their keep?
He's too intelligent to fall into the PBTory trap of equating a minority party with one-party rule.
I didn't really understand him clearly, but I think he was saying that the Tories had been hopeless as an opposition and as a result let the SNP get away with metaphorical murder as a government.
Well, he should know, of course.
The fact that he considers Anas Sarwar an exceptionally gifted politician will earn him undying mocking from Malc, of course.
That's nothing to be afraid of. If malky manages to reply to the right message he's on a good day.
I didn't realise that the Russian General Ukraine claimed to have killed today was said to have been killed on the edge of Kherson. Can Ukraine retake the city?
U.S Defense Officials are reporting that Russian Forces have begun to Lose Control of the Southern Ukrainian City of Kherson after Ukrainian Offensives began yesterday, Ukrainian Para-Military and Military Forces are Claimed to be advancing on the City from Multiple Directions.
I just don't see how anyone could vote Tory now when they're about as lying and corrupt as they've ever been. It just seems wrong to endorse that again.
Unless anyone can find a source to say otherwise, the casualty number for the Mariupol Theatre strike currently stands at zero. 130 people are said to have emerged unharmed, and the 'thousands' sheltering in the basement appear not to have been there at all. That's 3 for the hospital atrocity and none for the theatre atrocity. This is what I mean when I say 'the truth lies somewhere in the middle'.
300 now, you fascist shit
From the Evening Standard, paranthesis mine:
Mariupol City Council ((was said)) to have put out the grim news from eyewitness accounts, ((which could not be confirmed)) .
The civic leaders ((were reported as saying:)) “Unfortunately, we start this day with bad news.
“((From eyewitnesses, information appeared that about 300 people died)) in the Drama Theater of Mariupol as a result of a bombardment by a Russian aircraft.
Here's more of the same quote from CNN
"We still do not want to believe in this horror. We still want to believe that everyone managed to escape. But the words of those who were inside the building at the time of this terrorist act say otherwise."
If it's not even established enough as fact for those announcing it to believe it, I am not sure why it is treated as verified fact on PB. When the stakes are as high as they are for those defending the city and campaigning for a no fly zone, hearsay isn't enough.
Sadly serious divisions becoming apparent in the EU
I don’t think it’s sudden news that Orban is a problem.
No, but it was perhaps hoped that a Russian invasion might provoke a sea change in attitudes across the continent. And end to complacency, and cosying up. It does not seem so.
I think that analysis is rather premature, even if it is the instinctive view of armchair generals in Britain to sniff out continental treachery.
I'd give that more credence without the 'armchair general' crack which still makes no sense to me. Anyone commenting who is not there on the ground is an armchair general. And my point wasn't about continental treachery, is was about everyone, us included, not necessarily making as long term singificant a change re Russia as we might currently think we are.
I'll have you know I'm an armchair lance corporal. I know my place.
I'm an armchair orderly on latrine duty!
So an Armchair Commode-or?
Yes, well, the stuff he has to shovel from folk on here at times.
Still, at at least a lot of folk whiten their own sepulchres.
Like the gannet shite on Ailsa Craig/Bass Rock (take your pick)?
In my youth we used to climb gulls rock at St Abbs and the gannets aggression and vomit is something I have never forgotten
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
I do believe you when you say you *could*. What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
Sadly serious divisions becoming apparent in the EU
I don’t think it’s sudden news that Orban is a problem.
No, but it was perhaps hoped that a Russian invasion might provoke a sea change in attitudes across the continent. And end to complacency, and cosying up. It does not seem so.
I think that analysis is rather premature, even if it is the instinctive view of armchair generals in Britain to sniff out continental treachery.
I'd give that more credence without the 'armchair general' crack which still makes no sense to me. Anyone commenting who is not there on the ground is an armchair general. And my point wasn't about continental treachery, is was about everyone, us included, not necessarily making as long term singificant a change re Russia as we might currently think we are.
I'll have you know I'm an armchair lance corporal. I know my place.
I'm an armchair orderly on latrine duty!
So an Armchair Commode-or?
Yes, well, the stuff he has to shovel from folk on here at times.
Still, at at least a lot of folk whiten their own sepulchres.
Like the gannet shite on Ailsa Craig/Bass Rock (take your pick)?
In my youth we used to climb gulls rock at St Abbs and the gannets aggression and vomit is something I have never forgotten
I didn't realise that the Russian General Ukraine claimed to have killed today was said to have been killed on the edge of Kherson. Can Ukraine retake the city?
U.S Defense Officials are reporting that Russian Forces have begun to Lose Control of the Southern Ukrainian City of Kherson after Ukrainian Offensives began yesterday, Ukrainian Para-Military and Military Forces are Claimed to be advancing on the City from Multiple Directions.
I believe there are currently only two bridges across the Lower Dniepr under Russian control. One is just outside Kherson, and the other is a bit further north across from Nova Kakhovka.
There's a fair block of Russian forces further north, pushing towards Zaporizhia, who might be at risk of being cut off on the west bank of the Dniepr.
I didn't realise that the Russian General Ukraine claimed to have killed today was said to have been killed on the edge of Kherson. Can Ukraine retake the city?
U.S Defense Officials are reporting that Russian Forces have begun to Lose Control of the Southern Ukrainian City of Kherson after Ukrainian Offensives began yesterday, Ukrainian Para-Military and Military Forces are Claimed to be advancing on the City from Multiple Directions.
Well, fog of war and all that. But AFAICT, Ukrainians having Kherson would somewhat kybosh any Russian attempt to control the south coast.
Oh Dear. How Sad. Never Mind.
No its would not affect that, the land bridge would be form the Crimea east to Russia, Kherson it to the west of Crimea. so its territory's Russia is probably prepared to give up anyway.
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
I do believe you when you say you *could*. What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
Genuinely my main fear with Labour is their addiction to spending
Sadly, the sanctions, most of them anyway will be lifted very quickly, Germany and others need Russian gas, and other commodity's in significant quantity's to stop price rises and reception, France and a few others don't what sanctions to get it the way of there business, and will largely ignore or work around them, and fairly quickly other companies and contrary's will be saying why are we missing out on business. Some sanctions e.g. on top grade computer chips might remain but china and black market middle men will get enough to Russia. some of the big Yauts might stay frozen as symbols that we are still sanctioning but not much more than that.
Germany and others will spend a touch more on military this year and maybe next, but the 100 million will be delayed and then forgotten, not that it would have done much anyway, Germany has now after 3 weeks run out of kit they can send to Ukraine, apparently, because they have very lintel usable spare kit.
Ukraine will largely feel abandoned by the west, sad that after being so brave they still had to concede so much to Russia, traumatised by the fighting and all the death. and still have shattered infastucher,
Russia will still have been able to expand its territory in an unprovoked war, yes his men did not do well, but his people at home don't know/believe that, to them he looks like a hero. his army will learn lessons, and be able to make better weapons have better combat based tuning. and will be stronger next time. He has lost a lot of men, but Putin does not care, most of the equipment he has lost was old or not very good. Putin now has stronger control of Russia than he has ever had, with his control over the media, 15,000 of his opponents in prison, and many 100,000s more who have self exiled.
And today he has still proved Putin can still stock internal division in the West by mentioning JK Rolling. and he still has a big bargaining chip in the form of the 402,000 civilians he has deported form Mariupol and other places.
I hope I am wrong, and we still don't know, But I think Putin/authoritarian strongmen have won, and the west/freedom/democracy has lost. outside Europe North America, NZ, Australia South Korea and Japan. support has been thin on the ground for Ukraine, yes most nations voted one way in the UN, but not all and many abstained, others only did so with prodding and because they know it amounted to nothing. there does not seem even a willingness to explode Russia from the next G20 meeting.
all very sad, we as in the west had a window of opportunity to arm Ukraine to the max in the first week, MiG 29s, from Poland, S-300 from Slovakia, anti ship missiles for Odesa, or maybe land lunched torpedo's. and we could have sent enough uniforms, guns mortars, and so on for a 2 million army.
I think German rearming happens whatever - simply because of how embarrassed Germany has been by the preparedness of its forces. There's a piece in the NYTimes looking at their regiment in Lithuania, and how poorly equipped it is compared to British/Polish/Lithuanian forces.
I don't disagree with your other points: I think that much of Continental Europe would be happy with Putin to return to the pre-Feb 22 borders, and the oil and gas to start flowing again.
A better outcome for everyone - including the Russians themselves - is regime change. A new leader would (I'm sure) be very happy to walk back Putin's mistakes, because it is in Russia's interests.
If the West hangs together, and is willing to continue to back Ukraine, then I think we can achieve this. And Putin may well conspire to help us: simply he'll be desperate to show some gain (i.e. Mauripol and the coast), and I don't think that'll be sufficient.
I think a big chunk of Germany’s budget is going to have to be spent on training their trainers. Considering their best company trained the Russians it doesn’t look like there is any point in buying kit if they don’t know what to do with it when they have it.
Unless it was a giant trolling effort by the Germans - “yes Russian soldiers, best plan is to group tanks and infantry tight together on main roads surrounded by woodland”…. The best German joke since, well, ever.
I don't know whether training is the issue - I think it is simply that the Germans haven't bought any new kit for twenty years and none of their tanks even work.
There is a part of me that still thinks that having a Germany with no real army is not a bad thing...
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
I do believe you when you say you *could*. What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
Genuinely my main fear with Labour is their addiction to spending
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
I do believe you when you say you *could*. What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
Genuinely my main fear with Labour is their addiction to spending
Not as though we're offered much choice in that department.
Wasn't it Plato who said that democracy would always fail as eventually everyone would keep voting themselves a pay rise?
Edit - no, apparently it was an obscure theorist called Alexander Tytler.
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
I do believe you when you say you *could*. What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
Genuinely my main fear with Labour is their addiction to spending
Every single day my daughter asks if it is Strawberry Season yet.
Can't be many days until the start of the annual scare stories about shortages of Strawberries....
Ah, the smell of mown grass. The sound of children's laughter in the park. The rustle of the Daily Mail telling me that it is shocking that Strawberries are going to be unavailable this year due to the mysterious non-appearance of European fruit pickers, and also that they give me cancer.
I stay away from European fruit pickers for just that reason.
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
I do believe you when you say you *could*. What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
Genuinely my main fear with Labour is their addiction to spending
Sadly, the sanctions, most of them anyway will be lifted very quickly, Germany and others need Russian gas, and other commodity's in significant quantity's to stop price rises and reception, France and a few others don't what sanctions to get it the way of there business, and will largely ignore or work around them, and fairly quickly other companies and contrary's will be saying why are we missing out on business. Some sanctions e.g. on top grade computer chips might remain but china and black market middle men will get enough to Russia. some of the big Yauts might stay frozen as symbols that we are still sanctioning but not much more than that.
Germany and others will spend a touch more on military this year and maybe next, but the 100 million will be delayed and then forgotten, not that it would have done much anyway, Germany has now after 3 weeks run out of kit they can send to Ukraine, apparently, because they have very lintel usable spare kit.
Ukraine will largely feel abandoned by the west, sad that after being so brave they still had to concede so much to Russia, traumatised by the fighting and all the death. and still have shattered infastucher,
Russia will still have been able to expand its territory in an unprovoked war, yes his men did not do well, but his people at home don't know/believe that, to them he looks like a hero. his army will learn lessons, and be able to make better weapons have better combat based tuning. and will be stronger next time. He has lost a lot of men, but Putin does not care, most of the equipment he has lost was old or not very good. Putin now has stronger control of Russia than he has ever had, with his control over the media, 15,000 of his opponents in prison, and many 100,000s more who have self exiled.
And today he has still proved Putin can still stock internal division in the West by mentioning JK Rolling. and he still has a big bargaining chip in the form of the 402,000 civilians he has deported form Mariupol and other places.
I hope I am wrong, and we still don't know, But I think Putin/authoritarian strongmen have won, and the west/freedom/democracy has lost. outside Europe North America, NZ, Australia South Korea and Japan. support has been thin on the ground for Ukraine, yes most nations voted one way in the UN, but not all and many abstained, others only did so with prodding and because they know it amounted to nothing. there does not seem even a willingness to explode Russia from the next G20 meeting.
all very sad, we as in the west had a window of opportunity to arm Ukraine to the max in the first week, MiG 29s, from Poland, S-300 from Slovakia, anti ship missiles for Odesa, or maybe land lunched torpedo's. and we could have sent enough uniforms, guns mortars, and so on for a 2 million army.
I think German rearming happens whatever - simply because of how embarrassed Germany has been by the preparedness of its forces. There's a piece in the NYTimes looking at their regiment in Lithuania, and how poorly equipped it is compared to British/Polish/Lithuanian forces.
I don't disagree with your other points: I think that much of Continental Europe would be happy with Putin to return to the pre-Feb 22 borders, and the oil and gas to start flowing again.
A better outcome for everyone - including the Russians themselves - is regime change. A new leader would (I'm sure) be very happy to walk back Putin's mistakes, because it is in Russia's interests.
If the West hangs together, and is willing to continue to back Ukraine, then I think we can achieve this. And Putin may well conspire to help us: simply he'll be desperate to show some gain (i.e. Mauripol and the coast), and I don't think that'll be sufficient.
I think a big chunk of Germany’s budget is going to have to be spent on training their trainers. Considering their best company trained the Russians it doesn’t look like there is any point in buying kit if they don’t know what to do with it when they have it.
Unless it was a giant trolling effort by the Germans - “yes Russian soldiers, best plan is to group tanks and infantry tight together on main roads surrounded by woodland”…. The best German joke since, well, ever.
I don't know whether training is the issue - I think it is simply that the Germans haven't bought any new kit for twenty years and none of their tanks even work.
There is a part of me that still thinks that having a Germany with no real army is not a bad thing...
Moi aussi.
It kind of suits the UK to be one of only three serious players in Europe this side of the Carpathians.
If Russia does pivot toward 'merely' looking to take Donbas and a land corridor to Crimea, and they claim that was the plan all along, then it makes their brutalisation of other areas even more of a war crime than it already was, since it wouldn't have even been in pursuit of their aims (civilian apartments in Kyiv don't need taking down to to demilitarise Ukraine after all).
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
I do believe you when you say you *could*. What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
Genuinely my main fear with Labour is their addiction to spending
I didn't realise that the Russian General Ukraine claimed to have killed today was said to have been killed on the edge of Kherson. Can Ukraine retake the city?
U.S Defense Officials are reporting that Russian Forces have begun to Lose Control of the Southern Ukrainian City of Kherson after Ukrainian Offensives began yesterday, Ukrainian Para-Military and Military Forces are Claimed to be advancing on the City from Multiple Directions.
Well, fog of war and all that. But AFAICT, Ukrainians having Kherson would somewhat kybosh any Russian attempt to control the south coast.
Oh Dear. How Sad. Never Mind.
No its would not affect that, the land bridge would be form the Crimea east to Russia, Kherson it to the west of Crimea. so its territory's Russia is probably prepared to give up anyway.
Perhaps: but one aim that has been posited is that Russia want to stop Ukraine having access to the sea. That would mean eventually taking the coast as far as Odessa. If they manage to get most of their troops out of the quagmire in the north, that might be achievable.
I always said the new look England attack was absolutely stellar, world class, rip through any batting line-up....
In all seriousness it's one reason even in during what looks like (and still was, yesterday) a terrible performance I try not to panic until the other lot have been in.
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
I do believe you when you say you *could*. What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
Genuinely my main fear with Labour is their addiction to spending
Not as though we're offered much choice in that department.
Wasn't it Plato who said that democracy would always fail as eventually everyone would keep voting themselves a pay rise?
when they weren't executing random generals, philosophers etc because they were bored of experts
I don't know about the pay rise argument though, it suggests that democracies work for a time till they don't and I think he hated them too much to concede that. But it's what 40 years since I read the Republic
Sadly serious divisions becoming apparent in the EU
I don’t think it’s sudden news that Orban is a problem.
No, but it was perhaps hoped that a Russian invasion might provoke a sea change in attitudes across the continent. And end to complacency, and cosying up. It does not seem so.
I think that analysis is rather premature, even if it is the instinctive view of armchair generals in Britain to sniff out continental treachery.
I'd give that more credence without the 'armchair general' crack which still makes no sense to me. Anyone commenting who is not there on the ground is an armchair general. And my point wasn't about continental treachery, is was about everyone, us included, not necessarily making as long term singificant a change re Russia as we might currently think we are.
I'll have you know I'm an armchair lance corporal. I know my place.
I'm an armchair orderly on latrine duty!
So an Armchair Commode-or?
Yes, well, the stuff he has to shovel from folk on here at times.
Still, at at least a lot of folk whiten their own sepulchres.
Like the gannet shite on Ailsa Craig/Bass Rock (take your pick)?
In my youth we used to climb gulls rock at St Abbs and the gannets aggression and vomit is something I have never forgotten
Wait till you meet a Fulmar.
That rings a bell of something seen on a day out to the museum :
I always said the new look England attack was absolutely stellar, world class, rip through any batting line-up....
In all seriousness it's one reason even in during what looks like (and still was, yesterday) a terrible performance I try not to panic until the other lot have been in.
You realise that the West Indies tail will now put on three hundred runs before declaring don't you?
Dearie me, BBC News have misplaced their customary fawning tone on the Rasta Royals & their Carribean jaunt: 'overtones of privilege and separation' in Jamaica. Still, things back on track for their Duke of Windsor commemorative visit to the Bahamas, the joy was inescapable apparently.
Telegraph (H. Mount) asking if the Commonwealth can be saved. But ££ so I never found out if they want to go all Fortress White Anglos like some 19th century racial-geographical strategist, or some on here
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
With the transference of the largely Labour areas of Arfon into already marginal Aberconwy, it will be a real 'on a knife-edge' seat in 2024.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Yes and of course the lib dems are nowhere
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
I do believe you when you say you *could*. What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
Genuinely my main fear with Labour is their addiction to spending
My fear is that the care far more about the poor, want to help, but have no more of an idea of how to sort the economy than anyone else. The windfall tax is probably a good short term idea, but it’s not a long term policy.
Such a global tracker fund is almost a perfect way to concentrate that risk.
Maybe I should pay some active fund manager to navigate these choppy seas?
Any suggestions? How are others navigating this risk?
It's a tricky one. On the one hand the stagflation and energy crisis led to a severe bear market. On the other hand the energy crisis and recession of 79-81 led to a long bull market.
I would be cautious with emerging markets, and think the US correction will develop into a bear market there. Asia is full of covid, and Europe has similar stagflation and energy problems to us, just sliced a bit differently. Consumer confidence is shaky everywhere.
A risk tolerant investor might want to invest for recovery, but I would go for something low risk until the summer and we have a better idea of future direction.
I thought @Luckyguy1983 was a big Tory though and behind what Johnson was doing? Bizarre
He has been pro-Russia for years. When MH17 was shot down, he would parrot whatever b/s was emanating out of Russia's backside, however contradictory it might be with what he had said the day before. The same with Syria.
There comes a time when it is irrelevant if someone is a paid Russian troll or just a fecking idiot: they become indistinguishable. But at least one earns a (near-worthless) Ruble.
Can’t see it as that account blocked me after I pointed out their dodgy re weighting of polls
It's today's Yougov poll
Isn't it from the YouGov bit which is weighted differently as I pointed out?
Maybe just accept Boris has poor ratings but Starmer is not that much better
I didn't say that, I was saying I thought it came from the differently weighted YouGov tracker.
My point is that you can't use it to compare ratings, just as you can't use it for Johnson's.
As I pointed out to you, Starmer hit +0 with Redfield, how do you explain such a disparity? He's higher with IPSOS as well.
This has been the same since he became leader and I have said so since then, I do not believe the YouGov tracker is useful.
(again, same for Johnson).
And no need to be so condescending, I only asked a question.
The polls do vary but the point is that Starmer is not inspiring
Definitely wooden, worthy, serious and a bit long winded. Not repulsive though (BJO excepted) so streets ahead of Corbyn.
We could do a lot worse than a serious and sober, if a little introverted, PM.
Starmer isn't inspiring at all - but he doesn't need to be. This is what Tories seem to not understand.
Actually, inspiring would be useful to him. Look at Blair: he won a mahoosive majority because he convinced people that things really could 'only get better' (whether they did or not depends on the views of the reader).
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
I showed my Politics group this video of Blair today.
Watching that (I described him as 'looking like Elrond after he'd had a few') it was really eerie to remember him in his pomp 25 years ago. Because although I never liked the man, there is no doubt he was a rare political talent and a truly formidable operator. He didn't really come across that way, although he made a few shrewd points.
I suppose it's easier to be brilliant when you don't have a record to live up to.
(It was also slightly ironic that he talked about the SNP governing without an opposition and getting away with behaving like an opposition as a result.)
That's odd. What did he think SLAB and Scons, not to mention the odd LD, do for their keep?
He's too intelligent to fall into the PBTory trap of equating a minority party with one-party rule.
I didn't really understand him clearly, but I think he was saying that the Tories had been hopeless as an opposition and as a result let the SNP get away with metaphorical murder as a government.
Well, he should know, of course.
The fact that he considers Anas Sarwar an exceptionally gifted politician will earn him undying mocking from Malc, of course.
Thanks. That's still odd - on both counts. But then he never really got Scotland, and if it hadn't been for Donald Dewar he would have come massively unstuck there.
Comments
I fear Starmer might be a little too lawyerly for 'good' instincts: delaying things in a crisis can be the same as making no decisions. It'd be interesting to see how he could have dealt with Covid and Ukraine compared to Boris.
But have they got anyone of the centre who is any good and would win the membership? Rishi is dead.
I have openly criticised Rishi for not helping the lower paid and those on benefits, but when Boris goes he will be in the mix for new leader
I am not a member of the conservative party but will rejoin when Boris stands down and I will support whoever the conservative mps and the membership choose as his successor
I would also comment that neither of us can predict the next GE which could be as late as January 2025, but you want Labour to win and of course you will cheer them on, why wouldn't you
What is vexatious about Big G is that we all know that if Starmer *was* inspiring, he’d be moaning that he was “too woke”, or “soft on Brexit, or “not doing enough about backbench radicals”.
He is the king of Whataboutery.
Such inspiration could be the difference between minority government and a big stonking majority.
edit: it's why John Smith would never have got the same majority Blair did in 1997. He was simply not as 'inspiring'.
It’s ISA season coming up and, like many, I’m looking at something to invest in.
My general approach would be to go for a global tracker with the lowest fees - something like the vanguard lifestrategy.
However, I’m getting cold feet. What if we really are in a period of de-globalisation, as posited by blackrock’s Larry Fink?
https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/investor-relations/larry-fink-chairmans-letter
Such a global tracker fund is almost a perfect way to concentrate that risk.
Maybe I should pay some active fund manager to navigate these choppy seas?
Any suggestions? How are others navigating this risk?
You have an identity crisis every week.
At least HYUFD doesn't pretend.
It also kind of worked for Biden.
I mean, I’m a Nandy-ite, and I personally do find Starmer worryingly bland. I wrote him off from the outset.
But I’ve been impressed by the way he has, seemingly stolidly but perhaps deviously, dispatched his internal enemies.
Enjoy your evening
His strategy from day one - as I said - has been to let the morons bury themselves.
And he's done it with Johnson too. And now with Rishi.
We were reasonably close to German industry, who were dominant in quite of lot of markets weren’t they, in lead up to First World War? The UK establishment quite close to Germans leading up to 2nd world war, Were there also arguments about dirty money and it’s influence when we were at war with Germany, Italy and Japan?
You too.
It was a different, more collective approach. This version of the Shadow cabinet is looking a lot more heavyweight. I thought Reeves did an excellent job on Wednesday for example. The jigsaw is not yet complete, but getting there.
I don't disagree with your other points: I think that much of Continental Europe would be happy with Putin to return to the pre-Feb 22 borders, and the oil and gas to start flowing again.
A better outcome for everyone - including the Russians themselves - is regime change. A new leader would (I'm sure) be very happy to walk back Putin's mistakes, because it is in Russia's interests.
If the West hangs together, and is willing to continue to back Ukraine, then I think we can achieve this. And Putin may well conspire to help us: simply he'll be desperate to show some gain (i.e. Mauripol and the coast), and I don't think that'll be sufficient.
Boris’s Ukraine bounce has been insipid, and his economic policy is in tatters. That’s besides the lingering odour left by partygate etc.
Levelling Up is dead, in fact it was never born.
Brexit is just a problem now to be managed away, even village idiots no longer believe it offers anything material.
Boris is weak on crime, weak on the Union, and health and education services are both struggling.
Keir is boring, but with Reeves, Streeting, Nandy, Lammy, Phillipson and Cooper he has the most credible support team we’ve seen since 2010. The Lib Dems can be relied upon to hurt the Tories in the more sandal-wearing shires.
All that remains is some decent policy, which Keir is far too shrewd to let drop until the eve of the election.
The simple request is show me your policies so I can judge them and if Labour have the best policies, just like I did for Blair, I could vote labour
Remember I have voted Labour before
Unless it was a giant trolling effort by the Germans - “yes Russian soldiers, best plan is to group tanks and infantry tight together on main roads surrounded by woodland”…. The best German joke since, well, ever.
https://twitter.com/IAPonomarenko/status/1507352079370792965
Show me the policies and if they are sensible with social fairness but not uncosted unrealistic spending then in 2024 I may well confound you
You do understand labour need my vote and conservatives like me to gain power in 2024 don't you
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0fKJ0wabtY
Watching that (I described him as 'looking like Elrond after he'd had a few') it was really eerie to remember him in his pomp 25 years ago. Because although I never liked the man, there is no doubt he was a rare political talent and a truly formidable operator. He didn't really come across that way, although he made a few shrewd points.
I suppose it's easier to be brilliant when you don't have a record to live up to.
(It was also slightly ironic that he talked about the SNP governing without an opposition and getting away with behaving like an opposition as a result.)
Britain lost an empire but has not found a role. I don't think that's quite true. Our job is to keep the western alliance together. Make sure the US remains interested in Europe and Europe remains committed to an alliance with the US. There are forces on both sides that can pull it apart.
However, if he'd tell a pollster today that he doesn't know how he will vote then the question is whether all the other GE2019 Tory voters who say the same will do likewise.
If they do the Tories win.
OSINTdefender @sentdefender
U.S Defense Officials are reporting that Russian Forces have begun to Lose Control of the Southern Ukrainian City of Kherson after Ukrainian Offensives began yesterday, Ukrainian Para-Military and Military Forces are Claimed to be advancing on the City from Multiple Directions.
https://twitter.com/sentdefender/status/1507422607787888650
Reading seats, Labour gains?
He's too intelligent to fall into the PBTory trap of equating a minority party with one-party rule.
You will be voting in a seat that will be one of the ones that decides the next Govt.
Well, he should know, of course.
The fact that he considers Anas Sarwar an exceptionally gifted politician will earn him undying mocking from Malc, of course.
The finest intelligence gathering combined with the finest military minds will be working out the way to bring that about. Taking a vast number of Russian prisoners of war is probably the only way the Ukrainians get their people back form being dispersed across Russia.
And probably the best way to get rid of Putin as having created a national disgrace.
https://twitter.com/arisof12/status/1507352433709703171/photo/1
Dan Lamothe @DanLamothe
For the first time in weeks, the Pentagon assessed today that Kherson, a port city in southern Ukraine, is no longer under full Russian control.
"It doesn't appear to be as solidly in Russian control as it was before,” the senior defense official said. “Ukrainians are trying to take Kherson back and we would argue that Kherson is actually contested territory again."
https://twitter.com/DanLamothe/status/1507423795996512261
its possible that because its not part of the areas that Russia looks to want to gain/keep they are now pulling some troops out of the area or at least not reinforcing/sending replacements. so it could still fit in to there overall stratagem.
I don't know whether training is the issue - I think it is simply that the Germans haven't bought any new kit for twenty years and none of their tanks even work.
As I have clearly said 2024 election depends on a sensible costed labour offer and I could vote labour as I did in 1997 and 2001 but of course I could vote conservative again if I thought it the right decision
I am there to be won over but frankly it is too far away to bother me at present
Oh Dear. How Sad. Never Mind.
Mariupol City Council ((was said)) to have put out the grim news from eyewitness accounts, ((which could not be confirmed)) .
The civic leaders ((were reported as saying:)) “Unfortunately, we start this day with bad news.
“((From eyewitnesses, information appeared that about 300 people died)) in the Drama Theater of Mariupol as a result of a bombardment by a Russian aircraft.
Here's more of the same quote from CNN
"We still do not want to believe in this horror. We still want to believe that everyone managed to escape. But the words of those who were inside the building at the time of this terrorist act say otherwise."
If it's not even established enough as fact for those announcing it to believe it, I am not sure why it is treated as verified fact on PB. When the stakes are as high as they are for those defending the city and campaigning for a no fly zone, hearsay isn't enough.
What would attract you, do you think, or — what do Labour need to stop doing?
https://twitter.com/KyivIndependent/status/1507362085860261892
There's a fair block of Russian forces further north, pushing towards Zaporizhia, who might be at risk of being cut off on the west bank of the Dniepr.
They just give it to their mates
Wasn't it Plato who said that democracy would always fail as eventually everyone would keep voting themselves a pay rise?
Edit - no, apparently it was an obscure theorist called Alexander Tytler.
See you later.
It kind of suits the UK to be one of only three serious players in Europe this side of the Carpathians.
If.
I don't know about the pay rise argument though, it suggests that democracies work for a time till they don't and I think he hated them too much to concede that. But it's what 40 years since I read the Republic
https://www.nms.ac.uk/explore-our-collections/collection-search-results/fulmar/682843.
Telegraph (H. Mount) asking if the Commonwealth can be saved. But ££ so I never found out if they want to go all Fortress White Anglos like some 19th century racial-geographical strategist, or some on here
I would be cautious with emerging markets, and think the US correction will develop into a bear market there. Asia is full of covid, and Europe has similar stagflation and energy problems to us, just sliced a bit differently. Consumer confidence is shaky everywhere.
A risk tolerant investor might want to invest for recovery, but I would go for something low risk until the summer and we have a better idea of future direction.
There comes a time when it is irrelevant if someone is a paid Russian troll or just a fecking idiot: they become indistinguishable. But at least one earns a (near-worthless) Ruble.
Of interest?
(Update:
https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/reporters/20210702-the-no-vote-generation-reinventing-politics-in-france)