HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Gosh has he said he wants to abolish devolution? Was that a piece of performative reactionary blurt-out at a Speccy dinner or something more than that?
Given the known consequences of Speccy and DT dinners, I think we need to take it very seriously. Though on checking, I'm conflating two things - apols
Though the Conservatives have effectivcely and in practice abandoned the Sewel convention which is a major retrograde step.
Boris would only shut Holyrood down if Sturgeon tried a 'wildcat' indyref2 referendum without UK government consent. Much as the Spanish government temporarily shut down the Catalan Parliament when the Catalan government held an independence referendum without Madrid's approval
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Do they stick to that though? My recollection is that the SNP are very happy to vote on theings in parliament that are devolved matters and so don't affect their own constituents. Admittedly the only example which springs to mind is something to do with hunting. And I don't think Nicola Sturgeon is benign to England. The way she ran the pandemic showed that. Do you remember the barring of people from Greater Manchester (where rates were lower than in Scotland)?
Sunday trading laws were another.
Yes, because of effects in Scotland by means of UK-wide company policies (very much at the TU's request IIRC).
Isn't it a devolved matter? The Scottish parliament could legislate for whatever restrictions it wanted.
Couldn't make the businesses behave themselves and treat their workers fairly. It was actually quite unusual but a case where the businesses IIRC were trying to erase the Sunday pay for their workers in Scotland by means of doing things down south, as I recall.
Isn't that the purpose of laws and regulations, or do we rely on businesses doing that out of the goodness of their heart?
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
You should have a bit more humility having supported Corbyn last time. Seriously, imagine Ukraine with a Corbyn PM.
I can't imagine Corbyn standing in Ukraine, let alone winning.
I think they've all retreated. Some say they had gone from Hostomel airport on Monday.
The Russians get to do a bit of a stock-take now. Word is that Putin won't see the comparison between troops and equipment sent across the border and the numbers that came back.
Maybe they'll stick the numbers in an appendix and put a bar chart together instead.
If they get the Lib Dems to produce the bar chart, he’ll think he’s won.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Gosh has he said he wants to abolish devolution? Was that a piece of performative reactionary blurt-out at a Speccy dinner or something more than that?
Given the known consequences of Speccy and DT dinners, I think we need to take it very seriously. Though on checking, I'm conflating two things - apols
Though the Conservatives have effectivcely and in practice abandoned the Sewel convention which is a major retrograde step.
Boris would only shut Holyrood down if Sturgeon tried a 'wildcat' indyref2 referendum without UK government consent. Much as the Spanish government temporarily shut down the Catalan Parliament when the Catalan government held an independence referendum without Madrid's approval
You do like your granny-bashers.
In any case, Mr Johnson is alreadfy trying to shut Holyrood down without losing the nice jobs for his chums, by violating the Scotland Act, duplicating efforts, and ignoring the Sewel Convention.
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Look, we all know you are not partisan, as you are not a true Tory. HYUFD has told us so many times.
As I started the gentle ribbing, let me say I fully accept that Big_G is not always partisan and is very fair and balanced most of the time.
In fact, he only returns to the fold on Thursdays.
A simple way to understand which seats the Lib Dems are focusing their limited resources is to identify which seats have already got prospective parliamentary candidates selected.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Do they stick to that though? My recollection is that the SNP are very happy to vote on theings in parliament that are devolved matters and so don't affect their own constituents. Admittedly the only example which springs to mind is something to do with hunting. And I don't think Nicola Sturgeon is benign to England. The way she ran the pandemic showed that. Do you remember the barring of people from Greater Manchester (where rates were lower than in Scotland)?
Sunday trading laws were another.
Yes, because of effects in Scotland by means of UK-wide company policies (very much at the TU's request IIRC).
Isn't it a devolved matter? The Scottish parliament could legislate for whatever restrictions it wanted.
Couldn't make the businesses behave themselves and treat their workers fairly. It was actually quite unusual but a case where the businesses IIRC were trying to erase the Sunday pay for their workers in Scotland by means of doing things down south, as I recall.
Isn't that the purpose of laws and regulations, or do we rely on businesses doing that out of the goodness of their heart?
Can't remember the details, but it was something that Labour very much supported, and they're no friends to the SNP.
"France’s ‘Iron Lady’: Inspired by Margaret Thatcher, could Valérie Pécresse succeed Macron? The chic mother-of-three pledges to create a ‘new France’ if elected the country’s first female head of state"
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Gosh has he said he wants to abolish devolution? Was that a piece of performative reactionary blurt-out at a Speccy dinner or something more than that?
Given the known consequences of Speccy and DT dinners, I think we need to take it very seriously. Though on checking, I'm conflating two things - apols
Though the Conservatives have effectivcely and in practice abandoned the Sewel convention which is a major retrograde step.
Boris would only shut Holyrood down if Sturgeon tried a 'wildcat' indyref2 referendum without UK government consent. Much as the Spanish government temporarily shut down the Catalan Parliament when the Catalan government held an independence referendum without Madrid's approval
Speculation that the Russian Mi-28 attack helicopter downed today was StarStreak's first blood. Hopefully this will further deter Russian aerial ground-support missions.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Do they stick to that though? My recollection is that the SNP are very happy to vote on theings in parliament that are devolved matters and so don't affect their own constituents. Admittedly the only example which springs to mind is something to do with hunting. And I don't think Nicola Sturgeon is benign to England. The way she ran the pandemic showed that. Do you remember the barring of people from Greater Manchester (where rates were lower than in Scotland)?
Sunday trading laws were another.
Yes, because of effects in Scotland by means of UK-wide company policies (very much at the TU's request IIRC).
Isn't it a devolved matter? The Scottish parliament could legislate for whatever restrictions it wanted.
Couldn't make the businesses behave themselves and treat their workers fairly. It was actually quite unusual but a case where the businesses IIRC were trying to erase the Sunday pay for their workers in Scotland by means of doing things down south, as I recall.
Isn't that the purpose of laws and regulations, or do we rely on businesses doing that out of the goodness of their heart?
Can't remember the details, but it was something that Labour very much supported, and they're no friends to the SNP.
I'm not sure how that's relevant for the discussion of whether or not the SNP vote on english-only matters. The Scottish parliament has that as a devolved area. If they want to enshrine protections for Scottish workers in law, they are free to do so.
Comfortable Labour hold in Doncaster. Small swing from Tories.
The outgoing Labour councillor (who was the chair of the crime committee) is wanted for extradition to the US on drugs charges, hence the by-election. Seems to have made no difference.
The red wall clearly still exists in some form, although the turnout was < 14%.
I wonder what proportion were postal votes...
Whatever the proportion, with it being Donny I hope the envelopes were pre-addressed. They could cope with scrawling an X somewhere but anything beyond that is pushing it. Bloody southerners. (It's about 15 miles away from me but still, South Yorks innit?)
I know that's meant to be a joke, but it gets a bit old after a while.
Not everyone is an ex-miner and "strong in arm and thick in 'ead".
Ah sorry mate I'm only messing. If it's any consolation, I'm from Knottingley. Ex-miners are ten a penny here, tons of whom are Geordies, Mackems and Scots. We are nothing if not multi-cultural in our post-industrial bleakness.
Fair enough. Knottingley isn't much removed. You are allowed.
It does bother me a bit when it comes from the usual comedians for whom everyone in certain parts of South Yorkshire are a stereotype.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Do they stick to that though? My recollection is that the SNP are very happy to vote on theings in parliament that are devolved matters and so don't affect their own constituents. Admittedly the only example which springs to mind is something to do with hunting. And I don't think Nicola Sturgeon is benign to England. The way she ran the pandemic showed that. Do you remember the barring of people from Greater Manchester (where rates were lower than in Scotland)?
Sunday trading laws were another.
Yes, because of effects in Scotland by means of UK-wide company policies (very much at the TU's request IIRC).
Isn't it a devolved matter? The Scottish parliament could legislate for whatever restrictions it wanted.
Couldn't make the businesses behave themselves and treat their workers fairly. It was actually quite unusual but a case where the businesses IIRC were trying to erase the Sunday pay for their workers in Scotland by means of doing things down south, as I recall.
Isn't that the purpose of laws and regulations, or do we rely on businesses doing that out of the goodness of their heart?
Can't remember the details, but it was something that Labour very much supported, and they're no friends to the SNP.
I'm not sure how that's relevant for the discussion of whether or not the SNP vote on english-only matters. The Scottish parliament has that as a devolved area. If they want to enshrine protections for Scottish workers in law, they are free to do so.
Neverhteless, it's pretty trivial (except for those affected). And it dealt with a UK-wide issue, of terms and conditions.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Gosh has he said he wants to abolish devolution? Was that a piece of performative reactionary blurt-out at a Speccy dinner or something more than that?
Given the known consequences of Speccy and DT dinners, I think we need to take it very seriously. Though on checking, I'm conflating two things - apols
Though the Conservatives have effectivcely and in practice abandoned the Sewel convention which is a major retrograde step.
Boris would only shut Holyrood down if Sturgeon tried a 'wildcat' indyref2 referendum without UK government consent. Much as the Spanish government temporarily shut down the Catalan Parliament when the Catalan government held an independence referendum without Madrid's approval
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Do they stick to that though? My recollection is that the SNP are very happy to vote on theings in parliament that are devolved matters and so don't affect their own constituents. Admittedly the only example which springs to mind is something to do with hunting. And I don't think Nicola Sturgeon is benign to England. The way she ran the pandemic showed that. Do you remember the barring of people from Greater Manchester (where rates were lower than in Scotland)?
Sunday trading laws were another.
Yes, because of effects in Scotland by means of UK-wide company policies (very much at the TU's request IIRC).
Isn't it a devolved matter? The Scottish parliament could legislate for whatever restrictions it wanted.
Couldn't make the businesses behave themselves and treat their workers fairly. It was actually quite unusual but a case where the businesses IIRC were trying to erase the Sunday pay for their workers in Scotland by means of doing things down south, as I recall.
Isn't that the purpose of laws and regulations, or do we rely on businesses doing that out of the goodness of their heart?
Can't remember the details, but it was something that Labour very much supported, and they're no friends to the SNP.
I'm not sure how that's relevant for the discussion of whether or not the SNP vote on english-only matters. The Scottish parliament has that as a devolved area. If they want to enshrine protections for Scottish workers in law, they are free to do so.
Neverhteless, it's pretty trivial (except for those affected). And it dealt with a UK-wide issue, of terms and conditions.
If it's so trivial, why did they break one of their guiding principles for how they operate in the UK parliament? And I don't buy that argument. There was nothing stopping them from doing whatever they liked about Sunday trading in Scotland, and English MPs would have absolutely no say in the matter.
"France’s ‘Iron Lady’: Inspired by Margaret Thatcher, could Valérie Pécresse succeed Macron? The chic mother-of-three pledges to create a ‘new France’ if elected the country’s first female head of state"
Ha. Right under, on Vanilla anyways, a new poll showing her on 9%. She ain't gonna win.
Touch of Kamala Harris about her tilt. Launched and got immediate traction, looked The One for a short while, then just did not kick on, sank pretty quickly.
A simple way to understand which seats the Lib Dems are focusing their limited resources is to identify which seats have already got prospective parliamentary candidates selected.
I see Edward Lucas has replaced Chuka in Cities of London and Westminster
I don't think that's a LD prospect anymore TBH and reckon the LD vote was merely hugely inflated due to Chuka's media presence. LDs will probably be back into third next time. The LD vote is just as likely to collapse to Labour IMO as remain in 2nd/challenge for the seat. Labour has a reasonably solid core vote there. Even in 2019 the Labour vote was the same as 2015. The last by election in that constituency in May 2021 was a Labour hold with the LDs in third on 10%.
I think the same factors apply to Finchley even more so with potential boundary changes taking in part of Hornsey and Wood Green.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
You should have a bit more humility having supported Corbyn last time. Seriously, imagine Ukraine with a Corbyn PM.
Hardly something to drench the sheets thinking about. We're bit players in this. The fact of the invasion wasn't influenced by who the British PM is and neither will be how it pans out.
UK equipment support has been significant and Corbyn would have disrupted NATO decision making but invited Putin for a cuppa.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Do they stick to that though? My recollection is that the SNP are very happy to vote on theings in parliament that are devolved matters and so don't affect their own constituents. Admittedly the only example which springs to mind is something to do with hunting. And I don't think Nicola Sturgeon is benign to England. The way she ran the pandemic showed that. Do you remember the barring of people from Greater Manchester (where rates were lower than in Scotland)?
Sunday trading laws were another.
Yes, because of effects in Scotland by means of UK-wide company policies (very much at the TU's request IIRC).
Isn't it a devolved matter? The Scottish parliament could legislate for whatever restrictions it wanted.
Couldn't make the businesses behave themselves and treat their workers fairly. It was actually quite unusual but a case where the businesses IIRC were trying to erase the Sunday pay for their workers in Scotland by means of doing things down south, as I recall.
Isn't that the purpose of laws and regulations, or do we rely on businesses doing that out of the goodness of their heart?
Can't remember the details, but it was something that Labour very much supported, and they're no friends to the SNP.
I'm not sure how that's relevant for the discussion of whether or not the SNP vote on english-only matters. The Scottish parliament has that as a devolved area. If they want to enshrine protections for Scottish workers in law, they are free to do so.
Neverhteless, it's pretty trivial (except for those affected). And it dealt with a UK-wide issue, of terms and conditions.
If it's so trivial, why did they break one of their guiding principles for how they operate in the UK parliament? And I don't buy that argument. There was nothing stopping them from doing whatever they liked about Sunday trading in Scotland, and English MPs would have absolutely no say in the matter.
It is odd, and in that sense a mistake, but it may reflect some horse trading with Labour. But it was within the law at the time, and it remains a one off, and one impossible under EVEL (whose abolition is decidedly odder).
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
In any case: it is (rightly, IMV) SNP policy not to interfere in English internal matters, except where there is some knockon effect on Scotland. So Cookie's fretting is characteristic Tory panicmongering (not by Cookie himself I am sure). Especially as the Tories have pointedly deleted the one mechanism devised to control that issue, EVEL, other than the SNP's self-abnegation on the matter. Grievance manufacturing on their part. It's logical enough though for a British nationalist party - they can't complain if the SNP were in fact to have the balancing vote on an English-only policy, they were content to control Scots law and administration [edit] even when they did not have a majority of the vote in Scotland , and would still be, given what Mr Johnson has said about wanting to abolish devolution, which he retains the power to do.
Gosh has he said he wants to abolish devolution? Was that a piece of performative reactionary blurt-out at a Speccy dinner or something more than that?
Given the known consequences of Speccy and DT dinners, I think we need to take it very seriously. Though on checking, I'm conflating two things - apols
Though the Conservatives have effectivcely and in practice abandoned the Sewel convention which is a major retrograde step.
Boris would only shut Holyrood down if Sturgeon tried a 'wildcat' indyref2 referendum without UK government consent. Much as the Spanish government temporarily shut down the Catalan Parliament when the Catalan government held an independence referendum without Madrid's approval
Yes, that went terribly well.
It did, Catalonia is still in Spain
If only the Russians had listened to you, Ukraine, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia would still be part of the USSR.
A simple way to understand which seats the Lib Dems are focusing their limited resources is to identify which seats have already got prospective parliamentary candidates selected.
It's an interesting list. Only Windsor, Wycombe, Leeds NW and Mid Sussex I would say are completely unwinnable for the LDs at the next GE (although I don't think they have much chance in Cities of London and Westminster or Sheffield Hallam either) but the rest makes sense. I'm also a bit surprised they've replaced Phillip Lee in Wokingham.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
You should have a bit more humility having supported Corbyn last time. Seriously, imagine Ukraine with a Corbyn PM.
Hardly something to drench the sheets thinking about. We're bit players in this. The fact of the invasion wasn't influenced by who the British PM is and neither will be how it pans out.
The airlift of antitank weapons from the UK during Russia's build up was crucial to ensuring that Ukraine survived the initial onslaught. This subsequently stiffened the resolve of certain countries that would otherwise have regarded Russia's conquest as a fait accompli.
There's no guarantee that things would have turned out the same if we had a PM who regarded NATO as the root cause of the problem.
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
Not going to lie but I'm positively tumescent that our aircraft carriers are much bigger than the French one.
Don’t we have to buy carrier planes from the French now as we don’t have planes which can land on ours?
I think my dad said, for the “magnetic trap” to work each time plane lands, everything in the kitchen needs to be turned off first.
No. Ours don't have cats and traps.
I'm not aware that aircraft carriers have ever used magnetic traps; I thought it was cables. @Dura_Ace may advise differently.
I don't think magnetic stopping is quite here yet.
USS Gerald Ford is now operational with AAG which uses a combination of water turbines and an induction motor the size of a house for arresting recovered aircraft.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
Yes but if Labour win most seats in a hung parliament and unless the SNP vote with the Tories, Starmer could become PM and get most bills through
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
A simple way to understand which seats the Lib Dems are focusing their limited resources is to identify which seats have already got prospective parliamentary candidates selected.
I see Edward Lucas has replaced Chuka in Cities of London and Westminster
I don't think that's a LD prospect anymore TBH and reckon the LD vote was merely hugely inflated due to Chuka's media presence. LDs will probably be back into third next time. The LD vote is just as likely to collapse to Labour IMO as remain in 2nd/challenge for the seat. Labour has a reasonably solid core vote there. Even in 2019 the Labour vote was the same as 2015. The last by election in that constituency in May 2021 was a Labour hold with the LDs in third on 10%.
I think the same factors apply to Finchley even more so with potential boundary changes taking in part of Hornsey and Wood Green.
I could easily see Chuka returning to Labour anyway now and even getting a safe seat again and in Starmer's Cabinet if Labour win the next election.
Corbyn was what saw him leave Labour, Starmer is more in his mould.
On current polling I agree Labour rather than the LDs will likely take Cities of London and Westminster. Finchley should be a narrow Tory hold, again from Labour, probably will be the only Tory seat left in Barnet with Chipping Barnet and Hendon going Labour
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
Did you get something for your wife as well?
Yes but she has had me for near 60 years. !!!
And virtually no masks - rather strange
TMI, Big G what you get up to with Mrs Big G in the privacy of your own home is your own business.
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
Did you get something for your wife as well?
Yes but she has had me for near 60 years. !!!
And virtually no masks - rather strange
TMI, Big G what you get up to with Mrs Big G in the privacy of your own home is your own business.
Just looking after each other and make sure we each take our pills!!
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
Yes but if Labour win most seats in a hung parliament and unless the SNP vote with the Tories, Starmer could become PM and get most bills through
True but it's a bit of an indictment of the so-called popularity of a potential "rainbow coalition" that they don't seem to be able to win a majority even though it consists of about 5 parties (not including the SNP).
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has encouraged critics to reset relations after the UN body that assesses national human rights institutions rejected a request by campaigners to review the EHRC’s international accreditation.
The Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, through the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), last week rejected a complaint by Stonewall and other groups who had questioned the EHRC’s independence and effectiveness and sought a special review of the EHRC’s ‘A Status’.
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
Yes but if Labour win most seats in a hung parliament and unless the SNP vote with the Tories, Starmer could become PM and get most bills through
If Labour were to run a minority government, it would put more pressure on the left wing to support them, than a grand coalition majority. It would probably suit Starmer better.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
Yes but if Labour win most seats in a hung parliament and unless the SNP vote with the Tories, Starmer could become PM and get most bills through
True but it's a bit of an indictment of the so-called popularity of a potential "rainbow coalition" that they don't seem to be able to win a majority even though it consists of about 5 parties (not including the SNP).
Err, if it was fewer parties representing a coalition they would win more seats not less. The system rewards fewer parties not more*. 55% with several parties is far less valuable than 40% with 1 party.
* This is quite unlike the covid rules where if you had one party as a student you would get a big fine, but if you have multiple parties as a PM you get off free.
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
The sanest (and one of the best informed) voices on the pandemic origins.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1509904189853368323 With all due respect for fact that different people have differing motives and sincerity, I think we need both more investigation of COVID-19 origins and more careful thought about safety of work with potential pandemic pathogens....
I say this as someone who studies viral mutations and knows that virology (through vaccines) has probably saved more lives than any other biomedical field of study (except perhaps antibiotics)....
But if you think there is even a 1% chance that a lab accident caused a pandemic that's taken ~18 million lives (and given all the unknowns in China, I think chance is substantially higher), that should cause some serious introspection by all scientists....
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
What did you get?
Dine in for 2 for £12 chicken kief
Kyiv.
They have most certainly proved they are not chickens in kyiv. Tiger or Lion kyiv perhaps more suitable.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
Yes but if Labour win most seats in a hung parliament and unless the SNP vote with the Tories, Starmer could become PM and get most bills through
True but it's a bit of an indictment of the so-called popularity of a potential "rainbow coalition" that they don't seem to be able to win a majority even though it consists of about 5 parties (not including the SNP).
The ludicrous gerrymandered boundaries might have something to do with it...
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
Yes but if Labour win most seats in a hung parliament and unless the SNP vote with the Tories, Starmer could become PM and get most bills through
True but it's a bit of an indictment of the so-called popularity of a potential "rainbow coalition" that they don't seem to be able to win a majority even though it consists of about 5 parties (not including the SNP).
Err, if it was fewer parties representing a coalition they would win more seats not less. The system rewards fewer parties not more*. 55% with several parties is far less valuable than 40% with 1 party.
* This is quite unlike the covid rules where if you had one party as a student you would get a big fine, but if you have multiple parties as a PM you get off free.
Too early to say ...
Though there's an interesting piece in the i doing a survey of police forces and determining just how, erm, exceptional it is for a police force to investigate witnesses and possible culprits/violators by using an email questionnaire.
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
What did you get?
Dine in for 2 for £12 chicken kief
Kyiv.
They have most certainly proved they are not chickens in kyiv. Tiger or Lion kyiv perhaps more suitable.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
Yes but if Labour win most seats in a hung parliament and unless the SNP vote with the Tories, Starmer could become PM and get most bills through
True but it's a bit of an indictment of the so-called popularity of a potential "rainbow coalition" that they don't seem to be able to win a majority even though it consists of about 5 parties (not including the SNP).
The ludicrous gerrymandered boundaries might have something to do with it...
The Tories did not win a majority in 2010 even though they had a 7% lead on the popular vote.
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
What did you get?
Dine in for 2 for £12 chicken kief
Kyiv.
They have most certainly proved they are not chickens in kyiv. Tiger or Lion kyiv perhaps more suitable.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
“A vote for Labour means without doubt the end of the Union. If you believe in the UK your only option is to vote Conservative and prevent the coalition from hell. A vote for Labour is a threat to the Brexit you voted for, and turns back the clock on all Brexit gains and benefits we have made. A vote for Labour is our defences neutralised, meaning we will all end up speaking Russian.”
“"And yes, it's an absolutely incredible fact - and it's true - at a time when Russia is being led by a president who is capable of bullying and threats, who's plainly capable of making dangerous and irrational decisions, we have a Labour Party, a Labour Party, whose shadow cabinet is stuffed with people who only recently voted to abolish the UK's independent nuclear deterrent. That's right. Eight of them. "Do we want them in charge, my friends, at this moment? Do we want them running up the white flag? Do you see them standing up to Putin's blackmail?"
Imagine this from every Tory hustings and every Tory newspaper for a whole month. What makes Labour think they can top 230 seats let only 250? Getting those seats back the Corbyn madness threw away ain’t going to be quite as easy as so many hope for, is it?
What electoral facts do we have to go by? Labours last parliament by election gain? Labours vote share in council by elections is on the floor. Labour and Libdems even seem to be struggling in the governments mid term nadir. At no point have the midland marginals stopped loving Boris and Brexit, despite everything thrown at him.
Correct me where wrong, but brushing aside all the 80 seat majority, and the rest to stop Boris forming coalition government, doesn’t look on this mid term does it?
Something quite big and major needs to happen to change the direction this is inevitably travelling.
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
The sanest (and one of the best informed) voices on the pandemic origins.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1509904189853368323 With all due respect for fact that different people have differing motives and sincerity, I think we need both more investigation of COVID-19 origins and more careful thought about safety of work with potential pandemic pathogens....
I say this as someone who studies viral mutations and knows that virology (through vaccines) has probably saved more lives than any other biomedical field of study (except perhaps antibiotics)....
But if you think there is even a 1% chance that a lab accident caused a pandemic that's taken ~18 million lives (and given all the unknowns in China, I think chance is substantially higher), that should cause some serious introspection by all scientists....
I strongly disagree that more investigation of COVID origins is either warranted or helpful.
Seeking origins cannot be divorced at this point from pinning blame or avoiding being blamed. It can only result in the pushing of alternative truths and division within the scientific community based on national and other loyalties.
What is needed, and has already happened, is to consider ALL the ways in which COVID could have originated, and analyze how we can protect ourselves against each and every one of them going forward, or at least mitigate them to the extent possible.
I have said this from the very moment the US started pushing for the Wuhan investigation in a way that was antagonistic. And what did that WHO effort achieve of value? I'd argue is was worse than useless as it pushed China and its supporters into a defensive crouch, rather than a learning one.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
You should have a bit more humility having supported Corbyn last time. Seriously, imagine Ukraine with a Corbyn PM.
Hardly something to drench the sheets thinking about. We're bit players in this. The fact of the invasion wasn't influenced by who the British PM is and neither will be how it pans out.
UK equipment support has been significant and Corbyn would have disrupted NATO decision making but invited Putin for a cuppa.
Significant but in no way pivotal and I doubt all of that on Corbyn. He messed up on Salisbury but on the whole has a stronger anti-Putin back catalogue than many on the right of politics, inc many Tories. Goes right back to Chechnya. Furthermore, not so in thrall to Russian money as the guys we have in charge now. And he'd have probably been better on refugees too.
Anyway, none of this is provable either way. The notion that PM Corbyn cf PM Johnson would have made a material negative difference to the Ukraine war is imo just another example of what I call "Having Voted For Johnson Derangement Syndrome".
HVFJDS for short.
It's all an attempt to 'manage' the troubled deep interiors caused by being suckered by an arch conman. Self-respect is at stake. Because that's what conmen do - they strip their victims of that.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
Even someone as muscular as our PM might not have the strength to do so.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
Even someone as muscular as our PM might not have the strength to do so.
For some reason, whenever I see or hear of someone doing stupid stuff with explosive, I think of this
The sanest (and one of the best informed) voices on the pandemic origins.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1509904189853368323 With all due respect for fact that different people have differing motives and sincerity, I think we need both more investigation of COVID-19 origins and more careful thought about safety of work with potential pandemic pathogens....
I say this as someone who studies viral mutations and knows that virology (through vaccines) has probably saved more lives than any other biomedical field of study (except perhaps antibiotics)....
But if you think there is even a 1% chance that a lab accident caused a pandemic that's taken ~18 million lives (and given all the unknowns in China, I think chance is substantially higher), that should cause some serious introspection by all scientists....
I strongly disagree that more investigation of COVID origins is either warranted or helpful.
Seeking origins cannot be divorced at this point from pinning blame or avoiding being blamed. It can only result in the pushing of alternative truths and division within the scientific community based on national and other loyalties.
What is needed, and has already happened, is to consider ALL the ways in which COVID could have originated, and analyze how we can protect ourselves against each and every one of them going forward, or at least mitigate them to the extent possible.
I have said this from the very moment the US started pushing for the Wuhan investigation in a way that was antagonistic. And what did that WHO effort achieve of value? I'd argue is was worse than useless as it pushed China and its supporters into a defensive crouch, rather than a learning one.
That's good sense. Quite apart from establishing what actualluy happened, when we need cooperation, the trouble with studying the last event is one can get too focussed on the details of what did happen, and not on what else might happen. Like preparing too specifically for a flu virus.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
Even someone as muscular as our PM might not have the strength to do so.
For some reason, whenever I see or hear of someone doing stupid stuff with explosive, I think of this
TBF, the impression I get from reading the autobiographies of such Felixes as the chap in the photo is that they would blench at what the Ukies were doing. The curling equivalent of Russian roulette, so to speak.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
Even someone as muscular as our PM might not have the strength to do so.
The sanest (and one of the best informed) voices on the pandemic origins.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1509904189853368323 With all due respect for fact that different people have differing motives and sincerity, I think we need both more investigation of COVID-19 origins and more careful thought about safety of work with potential pandemic pathogens....
I say this as someone who studies viral mutations and knows that virology (through vaccines) has probably saved more lives than any other biomedical field of study (except perhaps antibiotics)....
But if you think there is even a 1% chance that a lab accident caused a pandemic that's taken ~18 million lives (and given all the unknowns in China, I think chance is substantially higher), that should cause some serious introspection by all scientists....
I strongly disagree that more investigation of COVID origins is either warranted or helpful.
Seeking origins cannot be divorced at this point from pinning blame or avoiding being blamed. It can only result in the pushing of alternative truths and division within the scientific community based on national and other loyalties.
What is needed, and has already happened, is to consider ALL the ways in which COVID could have originated, and analyze how we can protect ourselves against each and every one of them going forward, or at least mitigate them to the extent possible.
I have said this from the very moment the US started pushing for the Wuhan investigation in a way that was antagonistic. And what did that WHO effort achieve of value? I'd argue is was worse than useless as it pushed China and its supporters into a defensive crouch, rather than a learning one.
Which is why I support Jesse Bloom's stance - he is trying to find a middle way, IMO. He appears to have quite a lot on common with your views.
I think it's unrealistic to expect people to stop enquiring about Covid origins, which is why such an effort needs responsible voices.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
You should have a bit more humility having supported Corbyn last time. Seriously, imagine Ukraine with a Corbyn PM.
Hardly something to drench the sheets thinking about. We're bit players in this. The fact of the invasion wasn't influenced by who the British PM is and neither will be how it pans out.
UK equipment support has been significant and Corbyn would have disrupted NATO decision making but invited Putin for a cuppa.
Significant but in no way pivotal and I doubt all of that on Corbyn. He messed up on Salisbury but on the whole has a stronger anti-Putin back catalogue than many on the right of politics, inc many Tories. Goes right back to Chechnya. Furthermore, not so in thrall to Russian money as the guys we have in charge now. And he'd have probably been better on refugees too.
Anyway, none of this is provable either way. The notion that PM Corbyn cf PM Johnson would have made a material negative difference to the Ukraine war is imo just another example of what I call "Having Voted For Johnson Derangement Syndrome".
HVFJDS for short.
It's all an attempt to 'manage' the troubled deep interiors caused by being suckered by an arch conman. Self-respect is at stake. Because that's what conmen do - they strip their victims of that.
I would generally agree that who is PM would make little difference. And certainly that would be true if we're talking Starmer.
But, frankly, not of Corbyn. His basic premise is that the wrong side won the Cold War. He is profoundly anti-American and hates NATO.
To say he "messed up" on Salisbury and just dismiss it is laughable. His approach to that tells you all you need to know about him.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
Even someone as muscular as our PM might not have the strength to do so.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
Even someone as muscular as our PM might not have the strength to do so.
For some reason, whenever I see or hear of someone doing stupid stuff with explosive, I think of this
TBF, the impression I get from reading the autobiographies of such Felixes as the chap in the photo is that they would blench at what the Ukies were doing. The curling equivalent of Russian roulette, so to speak.
I once worked with a chap who had been a specialist in explosives in the oil industry, with previous military experience. He'd done senior management by the time I met him.
He was a very, very precise individual. Everything had to be done by process, and the process had to be well thought out and defined.
Exactly who you wanted in LNG plant operations, apparently.
EDIT - I think my thought process with the photo is that when people muck around with explosives, sooner or later an actual adult has to tidy up after them.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
You should have a bit more humility having supported Corbyn last time. Seriously, imagine Ukraine with a Corbyn PM.
Hardly something to drench the sheets thinking about. We're bit players in this. The fact of the invasion wasn't influenced by who the British PM is and neither will be how it pans out.
UK equipment support has been significant and Corbyn would have disrupted NATO decision making but invited Putin for a cuppa.
Significant but in no way pivotal and I doubt all of that on Corbyn. He messed up on Salisbury but on the whole has a stronger anti-Putin back catalogue than many on the right of politics, inc many Tories. Goes right back to Chechnya. Furthermore, not so in thrall to Russian money as the guys we have in charge now. And he'd have probably been better on refugees too.
Anyway, none of this is provable either way. The notion that PM Corbyn cf PM Johnson would have made a material negative difference to the Ukraine war is imo just another example of what I call "Having Voted For Johnson Derangement Syndrome".
HVFJDS for short.
It's all an attempt to 'manage' the troubled deep interiors caused by being suckered by an arch conman. Self-respect is at stake. Because that's what conmen do - they strip their victims of that.
I think it is you who is in denial. Corbyn has just signed the Stop the War petition that blames the West for Russia's actions and effectively calls on Ukraine to stop resisting. I voted LD but would reluctantly have voted Tory to stop Corbyn. Corbyn as PM would have been a shocking historical event that you were prepared to risk.
Illia Ponomarenko 🇺🇦 @IAPonomarenko · 1h Basically, Russian military presence northwest, west, and east of Kyiv has just ceased to exist. The Ukrainian forces have regained control of all key points, including Borodyanka and Ivankiv, Ukrainian forces are cleaning up Bucha, Vorzel and Hostomel.
Not going to lie but I'm positively tumescent that our aircraft carriers are much bigger than the French one.
Don’t we have to buy carrier planes from the French now as we don’t have planes which can land on ours?
I think my dad said, for the “magnetic trap” to work each time plane lands, everything in the kitchen needs to be turned off first.
No. Ours don't have cats and traps.
I'm not aware that aircraft carriers have ever used magnetic traps; I thought it was cables. @Dura_Ace may advise differently.
I don't think magnetic stopping is quite here yet.
USS Gerald Ford is now operational with AAG which uses a combination of water turbines and an induction motor the size of a house for arresting recovered aircraft.
Russia is running its military campaign against Ukraine out of Moscow, with no central war commander on the ground to call the shots, according to American officials who have studied the five-week-old war.
"Wandsworth: Labour councillor suspended for ‘go back to India’ tweet about Rishi Sunak 31st March 2022
An investigation has begun and the councillor will no longer be seeking re-election, according to the council's Labour group leader
A Labour councillor in Wandsworth has been suspended by the party and prevented from seeking re-election on 5 May after writing on Twitter that Chancellor Rishi Sunak “should go back to India with his billionaire wife”. Peter Carpenter, who currently represents the West Hill ward, has deleted his Twitter account, but not before the tweet, which also described Sunak, who was born in Southampton to Indian parents, as “a complete waste of space”, attracted a complaint."
President Putin was visited by a cancer surgeon 35 times in four years at his Black Sea residence, an investigation has claimed.
As Putin approaches his 70th birthday, he is attended by a brigade of doctors including Yevgeny Selivanov, an oncology surgeon who specialises in thyroid cancer, according to Proyekt, a Russian investigative journalism group.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
You should have a bit more humility having supported Corbyn last time. Seriously, imagine Ukraine with a Corbyn PM.
Hardly something to drench the sheets thinking about. We're bit players in this. The fact of the invasion wasn't influenced by who the British PM is and neither will be how it pans out.
The airlift of antitank weapons from the UK during Russia's build up was crucial to ensuring that Ukraine survived the initial onslaught. This subsequently stiffened the resolve of certain countries that would otherwise have regarded Russia's conquest as a fait accompli.
There's no guarantee that things would have turned out the same if we had a PM who regarded NATO as the root cause of the problem.
Essentially a rather fantastical alternative reality contrasted with a current one skewed to suit.
Yes, there's "no guarantee" that if Labour had won GE19 Ukraine wouldn't now be fully occupied by Russia - but going any further than this triggers a diagnosis from me of HVFJDS.
Hey, that's uncomfortably close to HYUFD, isn't it? Just realized that.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
There are for practical purposes no seats where Lab and LD are in contest for places 1 and 2 in a GE. In every relevant seat bar one or two the contest is Lab or LD (occasionally both) v the Tories. There is no logic whatever in both parties contesting all seats. The voters (ignore the parties themselves) believe it is Tory v Labour or Tory v LD. Never LD v labour.
By contesting all seats the centre left make it surer the Tories will win.
The SNP will, obvs, never support the Tories and would generally back a nonTory coalition, who could firm up the SNP support by pledging to support IndyRef2 at any time apart from the present moment or immediate future, thus agreeing with Nichola's extremely effective policy to keep all the jobs she can for the SNP boys and girls in perpetuity.
The relatively small margin against the far-left Melenchon must be a concern for him because it suggests that a good chunk of the vote he will need to beat Le Pen is soft.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
Back in the days of the Troubles I would bet I wasn't the only soldier who, in order to check their own car for IEDS each day on the mainland, would, simultaneously, shove down the bonnet above the wheel arch and jump up in the air, thus allowing room for any charge to pass harmlessly under the suspended feet.
That is insouciant. It reminds me of a kid I knew (when I was one) who around Nov 5th time would pop a banger in his mouth, light it like a cigarette, and let it fizz for a couple of seconds, before taking it out and throwing it so it went BANG in the air. The horrible thing you visualize never happened thankfully. Hopefully the same with these guys.
If those are anti-tank mines, then the pressure to set them off *should be* considerable.
Even someone as muscular as our PM might not have the strength to do so.
For some reason, whenever I see or hear of someone doing stupid stuff with explosive, I think of this
Those boys were cool as fuck. Iced water running through their veins. Total respect.
The sanest (and one of the best informed) voices on the pandemic origins.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1509904189853368323 With all due respect for fact that different people have differing motives and sincerity, I think we need both more investigation of COVID-19 origins and more careful thought about safety of work with potential pandemic pathogens....
I say this as someone who studies viral mutations and knows that virology (through vaccines) has probably saved more lives than any other biomedical field of study (except perhaps antibiotics)....
But if you think there is even a 1% chance that a lab accident caused a pandemic that's taken ~18 million lives (and given all the unknowns in China, I think chance is substantially higher), that should cause some serious introspection by all scientists....
I strongly disagree that more investigation of COVID origins is either warranted or helpful.
Seeking origins cannot be divorced at this point from pinning blame or avoiding being blamed. It can only result in the pushing of alternative truths and division within the scientific community based on national and other loyalties.
What is needed, and has already happened, is to consider ALL the ways in which COVID could have originated, and analyze how we can protect ourselves against each and every one of them going forward, or at least mitigate them to the extent possible.
I have said this from the very moment the US started pushing for the Wuhan investigation in a way that was antagonistic. And what did that WHO effort achieve of value? I'd argue is was worse than useless as it pushed China and its supporters into a defensive crouch, rather than a learning one.
Which is why I support Jesse Bloom's stance - he is trying to find a middle way, IMO. He appears to have quite a lot on common with your views.
I think it's unrealistic to expect people to stop enquiring about Covid origins, which is why such an effort needs responsible voices.
I'm sorry, this is ridiculous. Those same "responsible" voices have been casting doubt on anyone suggesting a lab leak and calling those who spoke out publicly all kinds of horrible things including being racist.
This feels like another attempt by the scientific establishment to protect their Chinese funding arrangements.
President Putin was visited by a cancer surgeon 35 times in four years at his Black Sea residence, an investigation has claimed.
As Putin approaches his 70th birthday, he is attended by a brigade of doctors including Yevgeny Selivanov, an oncology surgeon who specialises in thyroid cancer, according to Proyekt, a Russian investigative journalism group.
A simple way to understand which seats the Lib Dems are focusing their limited resources is to identify which seats have already got prospective parliamentary candidates selected.
It's an interesting list. Only Windsor, Wycombe, Leeds NW and Mid Sussex I would say are completely unwinnable for the LDs at the next GE (although I don't think they have much chance in Cities of London and Westminster or Sheffield Hallam either) but the rest makes sense. I'm also a bit surprised they've replaced Phillip Lee in Wokingham.
Interesting to see Andrew George still trying to win back St Ives which he lost in 2015. Missed by just 300 in 2017, but Tory lead over 4,000 in 2019. So it is doable but not in the bag. Imagine it's a Brexity sort of place.
Illia Ponomarenko 🇺🇦 @IAPonomarenko · 1h Basically, Russian military presence northwest, west, and east of Kyiv has just ceased to exist. The Ukrainian forces have regained control of all key points, including Borodyanka and Ivankiv, Ukrainian forces are cleaning up Bucha, Vorzel and Hostomel.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
Yes but if Labour win most seats in a hung parliament and unless the SNP vote with the Tories, Starmer could become PM and get most bills through
True but it's a bit of an indictment of the so-called popularity of a potential "rainbow coalition" that they don't seem to be able to win a majority even though it consists of about 5 parties (not including the SNP).
The ludicrous gerrymandered boundaries might have something to do with it...
The Tories did not win a majority in 2010 even though they had a 7% lead on the popular vote.
But they were 14% short of a majority of the votes. Even though it happens under FPTP you can't assume you have a right to win with a minority of the vote. Bizarrely of course if there are enough popular opponents or the vote spread is varied you can win with a very low vote. You can even lose with more than 50% of the vote.
The sanest (and one of the best informed) voices on the pandemic origins.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1509904189853368323 With all due respect for fact that different people have differing motives and sincerity, I think we need both more investigation of COVID-19 origins and more careful thought about safety of work with potential pandemic pathogens....
I say this as someone who studies viral mutations and knows that virology (through vaccines) has probably saved more lives than any other biomedical field of study (except perhaps antibiotics)....
But if you think there is even a 1% chance that a lab accident caused a pandemic that's taken ~18 million lives (and given all the unknowns in China, I think chance is substantially higher), that should cause some serious introspection by all scientists....
I strongly disagree that more investigation of COVID origins is either warranted or helpful.
Seeking origins cannot be divorced at this point from pinning blame or avoiding being blamed. It can only result in the pushing of alternative truths and division within the scientific community based on national and other loyalties.
What is needed, and has already happened, is to consider ALL the ways in which COVID could have originated, and analyze how we can protect ourselves against each and every one of them going forward, or at least mitigate them to the extent possible.
I have said this from the very moment the US started pushing for the Wuhan investigation in a way that was antagonistic. And what did that WHO effort achieve of value? I'd argue is was worse than useless as it pushed China and its supporters into a defensive crouch, rather than a learning one.
Which is why I support Jesse Bloom's stance - he is trying to find a middle way, IMO. He appears to have quite a lot on common with your views.
I think it's unrealistic to expect people to stop enquiring about Covid origins, which is why such an effort needs responsible voices.
I'm sorry, this is ridiculous. Those same "responsible" voices have been casting doubt on anyone suggesting a lab leak and calling those who spoke out publicly all kinds of horrible things including being racist.
This feels like another attempt by the scientific establishment to protect their Chinese funding arrangements.
Bloom is one of the responsible voices, who is very far from doing anything like that.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
There are for practical purposes no seats where Lab and LD are in contest for places 1 and 2 in a GE. In every relevant seat bar one or two the contest is Lab or LD (occasionally both) v the Tories. There is no logic whatever in both parties contesting all seats. The voters (ignore the parties themselves) believe it is Tory v Labour or Tory v LD. Never LD v labour.
By contesting all seats the centre left make it surer the Tories will win.
The SNP will, obvs, never support the Tories and would generally back a nonTory coalition, who could firm up the SNP support by pledging to support IndyRef2 at any time apart from the present moment or immediate future, thus agreeing with Nichola's extremely effective policy to keep all the jobs she can for the SNP boys and girls in perpetuity.
There are a few seats where the Tories were 3rd. Cambridge, Streatham and Hornsey and Wood Green had Labour 1st and the LDs 2nd in 2019 for instance, so are basically Labour v LD marginals
That is simply in response to the jibe, "Big_G won't be posting this" isn't it!
In truth I have been out in town and have been waiting to post it when I came back, but of course @CorrectHorseBattery prompted me to check it and post it
I am not as partisan as some may think
Just post it for completeness, it won’t change other results or overall picture this one one result.
As I said it was my intention to do so, but hardly possible when I was in M & S looking for a weekend treat to cook for my special lady
What did you get?
Dine in for 2 for £12 chicken kief
Kyiv.
They have most certainly proved they are not chickens in kyiv. Tiger or Lion kyiv perhaps more suitable.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
There are for practical purposes no seats where Lab and LD are in contest for places 1 and 2 in a GE. In every relevant seat bar one or two the contest is Lab or LD (occasionally both) v the Tories. There is no logic whatever in both parties contesting all seats. The voters (ignore the parties themselves) believe it is Tory v Labour or Tory v LD. Never LD v labour.
By contesting all seats the centre left make it surer the Tories will win.
The SNP will, obvs, never support the Tories and would generally back a nonTory coalition, who could firm up the SNP support by pledging to support IndyRef2 at any time apart from the present moment or immediate future, thus agreeing with Nichola's extremely effective policy to keep all the jobs she can for the SNP boys and girls in perpetuity.
Both LAB and the LDs have to put up candidates in all seats. This is vital to understand. They just don't campaign in seats where the other is best placed to beat the Tory. Just think back to the December by-elections.
The sanest (and one of the best informed) voices on the pandemic origins.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1509904189853368323 With all due respect for fact that different people have differing motives and sincerity, I think we need both more investigation of COVID-19 origins and more careful thought about safety of work with potential pandemic pathogens....
I say this as someone who studies viral mutations and knows that virology (through vaccines) has probably saved more lives than any other biomedical field of study (except perhaps antibiotics)....
But if you think there is even a 1% chance that a lab accident caused a pandemic that's taken ~18 million lives (and given all the unknowns in China, I think chance is substantially higher), that should cause some serious introspection by all scientists....
I strongly disagree that more investigation of COVID origins is either warranted or helpful.
Seeking origins cannot be divorced at this point from pinning blame or avoiding being blamed. It can only result in the pushing of alternative truths and division within the scientific community based on national and other loyalties.
What is needed, and has already happened, is to consider ALL the ways in which COVID could have originated, and analyze how we can protect ourselves against each and every one of them going forward, or at least mitigate them to the extent possible.
I have said this from the very moment the US started pushing for the Wuhan investigation in a way that was antagonistic. And what did that WHO effort achieve of value? I'd argue is was worse than useless as it pushed China and its supporters into a defensive crouch, rather than a learning one.
Which is why I support Jesse Bloom's stance - he is trying to find a middle way, IMO. He appears to have quite a lot on common with your views.
I think it's unrealistic to expect people to stop enquiring about Covid origins, which is why such an effort needs responsible voices.
I'm sorry, this is ridiculous. Those same "responsible" voices have been casting doubt on anyone suggesting a lab leak and calling those who spoke out publicly all kinds of horrible things including being racist.
This feels like another attempt by the scientific establishment to protect their Chinese funding arrangements.
Bloom is one of the responsible voices, who is very far from doing anything like that.
It just seems as though people who have been marginalised for suggesting a lab leak by the establishment are now being asked to trust the very same establishment to uncover the truth they denied for so long.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
“A vote for Labour means without doubt the end of the Union. If you believe in the UK your only option is to vote Conservative and prevent the coalition from hell. A vote for Labour is a threat to the Brexit you voted for, and turns back the clock on all Brexit gains and benefits we have made. A vote for Labour is our defences neutralised, meaning we will all end up speaking Russian.”
“"And yes, it's an absolutely incredible fact - and it's true - at a time when Russia is being led by a president who is capable of bullying and threats, who's plainly capable of making dangerous and irrational decisions, we have a Labour Party, a Labour Party, whose shadow cabinet is stuffed with people who only recently voted to abolish the UK's independent nuclear deterrent. That's right. Eight of them. "Do we want them in charge, my friends, at this moment? Do we want them running up the white flag? Do you see them standing up to Putin's blackmail?"
Imagine this from every Tory hustings and every Tory newspaper for a whole month. What makes Labour think they can top 230 seats let only 250? Getting those seats back the Corbyn madness threw away ain’t going to be quite as easy as so many hope for, is it?
What electoral facts do we have to go by? Labours last parliament by election gain? Labours vote share in council by elections is on the floor. Labour and Libdems even seem to be struggling in the governments mid term nadir. At no point have the midland marginals stopped loving Boris and Brexit, despite everything thrown at him.
Correct me where wrong, but brushing aside all the 80 seat majority, and the rest to stop Boris forming coalition government, doesn’t look on this mid term does it?
Something quite big and major needs to happen to change the direction this is inevitably travelling.
I agree this is a genuine factor. If the next election is about UK security, armed forces, NATO and all that then Labour will have an uphill fight. SKS is doing as well as he can to counter this.
Mathematically the chance of an outright Labour win (326 seats) are tiny (despite the 4/1 being offered). But the chance of the Tories falling below their critical number (it is about 317?) remain mathematically high. They have for the moment lost the north.
This indicates to me that the alchemy of elections is likely to produce either a Tory majority or a centre left alliance which the LDs will have the power to make or break. I give each outcome an equal chance at the moment.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
There are for practical purposes no seats where Lab and LD are in contest for places 1 and 2 in a GE. In every relevant seat bar one or two the contest is Lab or LD (occasionally both) v the Tories. There is no logic whatever in both parties contesting all seats. The voters (ignore the parties themselves) believe it is Tory v Labour or Tory v LD. Never LD v labour.
By contesting all seats the centre left make it surer the Tories will win.
The SNP will, obvs, never support the Tories and would generally back a nonTory coalition, who could firm up the SNP support by pledging to support IndyRef2 at any time apart from the present moment or immediate future, thus agreeing with Nichola's extremely effective policy to keep all the jobs she can for the SNP boys and girls in perpetuity.
There are a few seats where the Tories were 3rd. Cambridge, Streatham and Hornsey and Wood Green had Labour 1st and the LDs 2nd in 2019 for instance, so are basically Labour v LD marginals
Sheffield Hallam is one of the most famous examples.
A simple way to understand which seats the Lib Dems are focusing their limited resources is to identify which seats have already got prospective parliamentary candidates selected.
It's an interesting list. Only Windsor, Wycombe, Leeds NW and Mid Sussex I would say are completely unwinnable for the LDs at the next GE (although I don't think they have much chance in Cities of London and Westminster or Sheffield Hallam either) but the rest makes sense. I'm also a bit surprised they've replaced Phillip Lee in Wokingham.
Interesting to see Andrew George still trying to win back St Ives which he lost in 2015. Missed by just 300 in 2017, but Tory lead over 4,000 in 2019. So it is doable but not in the bag. Imagine it's a Brexity sort of place.
As I recall, he was about as Brexity as LibDems go, himself
There are a number on the team. At least one is a SLD activist in Lothian but several others seem to be based/resident in Scotland, so Scottish by residence.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
There are for practical purposes no seats where Lab and LD are in contest for places 1 and 2 in a GE. In every relevant seat bar one or two the contest is Lab or LD (occasionally both) v the Tories. There is no logic whatever in both parties contesting all seats. The voters (ignore the parties themselves) believe it is Tory v Labour or Tory v LD. Never LD v labour.
By contesting all seats the centre left make it surer the Tories will win.
The SNP will, obvs, never support the Tories and would generally back a nonTory coalition, who could firm up the SNP support by pledging to support IndyRef2 at any time apart from the present moment or immediate future, thus agreeing with Nichola's extremely effective policy to keep all the jobs she can for the SNP boys and girls in perpetuity.
There are a few seats where the Tories were 3rd. Cambridge, Streatham and Hornsey and Wood Green had Labour 1st and the LDs 2nd in 2019 for instance, so are basically Labour v LD marginals
Agree. You can add Sheffield Hallam to that. Few - very few - is the operative word.
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
There are for practical purposes no seats where Lab and LD are in contest for places 1 and 2 in a GE. In every relevant seat bar one or two the contest is Lab or LD (occasionally both) v the Tories. There is no logic whatever in both parties contesting all seats. The voters (ignore the parties themselves) believe it is Tory v Labour or Tory v LD. Never LD v labour.
By contesting all seats the centre left make it surer the Tories will win.
The SNP will, obvs, never support the Tories and would generally back a nonTory coalition, who could firm up the SNP support by pledging to support IndyRef2 at any time apart from the present moment or immediate future, thus agreeing with Nichola's extremely effective policy to keep all the jobs she can for the SNP boys and girls in perpetuity.
There are a few seats where the Tories were 3rd. Cambridge, Streatham and Hornsey and Wood Green had Labour 1st and the LDs 2nd in 2019 for instance, so are basically Labour v LD marginals
Agree. You can add Sheffield Hallam to that. Few - very few - is the operative word.
Plus Vauxhall, Bermondsey and Old Southwark and both Islington seats are Labour v LD seats. Very few maybe but still 10 seats or so in England where the Tories are not in contention and also 1 or 2 in Wales like Ceredigion where the battle is normally Plaid v LD and Arfon where it is Plaid v Labour
Every forecast I've seen recently, from the New Statesman to ElectoralCalculus, is putting a coalition of Labour, LDs, Greens, Plaid Cymru and SDLP short of a majority. In other words, the SNP would hold the balance of power.
There are for practical purposes no seats where Lab and LD are in contest for places 1 and 2 in a GE. In every relevant seat bar one or two the contest is Lab or LD (occasionally both) v the Tories. There is no logic whatever in both parties contesting all seats. The voters (ignore the parties themselves) believe it is Tory v Labour or Tory v LD. Never LD v labour.
By contesting all seats the centre left make it surer the Tories will win.
The SNP will, obvs, never support the Tories and would generally back a nonTory coalition, who could firm up the SNP support by pledging to support IndyRef2 at any time apart from the present moment or immediate future, thus agreeing with Nichola's extremely effective policy to keep all the jobs she can for the SNP boys and girls in perpetuity.
Both LAB and the LDs have to put up candidates in all seats. This is vital to understand. They just don't campaign in seats where the other is best placed to beat the Tory. Just think back to the December by-elections.
Noted; but as Labour have not won an election without the Blair factor since 1974 does it need either a Blair leader who demolishes everything in sight or does the centre left need some new thinking about how to win elections without a genius in charge?
The sanest (and one of the best informed) voices on the pandemic origins.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1509904189853368323 With all due respect for fact that different people have differing motives and sincerity, I think we need both more investigation of COVID-19 origins and more careful thought about safety of work with potential pandemic pathogens....
I say this as someone who studies viral mutations and knows that virology (through vaccines) has probably saved more lives than any other biomedical field of study (except perhaps antibiotics)....
But if you think there is even a 1% chance that a lab accident caused a pandemic that's taken ~18 million lives (and given all the unknowns in China, I think chance is substantially higher), that should cause some serious introspection by all scientists....
I strongly disagree that more investigation of COVID origins is either warranted or helpful.
Seeking origins cannot be divorced at this point from pinning blame or avoiding being blamed. It can only result in the pushing of alternative truths and division within the scientific community based on national and other loyalties.
What is needed, and has already happened, is to consider ALL the ways in which COVID could have originated, and analyze how we can protect ourselves against each and every one of them going forward, or at least mitigate them to the extent possible.
I have said this from the very moment the US started pushing for the Wuhan investigation in a way that was antagonistic. And what did that WHO effort achieve of value? I'd argue is was worse than useless as it pushed China and its supporters into a defensive crouch, rather than a learning one.
Which is why I support Jesse Bloom's stance - he is trying to find a middle way, IMO. He appears to have quite a lot on common with your views.
I think it's unrealistic to expect people to stop enquiring about Covid origins, which is why such an effort needs responsible voices.
I'm sorry, this is ridiculous. Those same "responsible" voices have been casting doubt on anyone suggesting a lab leak and calling those who spoke out publicly all kinds of horrible things including being racist.
This feels like another attempt by the scientific establishment to protect their Chinese funding arrangements.
I have nothing to protect vis a vis Chinese funding. No connection whatsoever. I do have a strong, lifelong interest in protecting the UK, the West and the world against future biological threats. What serves learning now to prevent and mitigate future threats is the sole thing that motivates me. And it is my considered opinion that further efforts to 'get to the truth' will not only not do that, but will further damage our ability to learn and prepare.
No doubt there are some who have egg on their faces for whom wrapping this all up would be convenient. But that still would not make pushing more investigations either right or useful.
HY was spot on actually with a post yesterday, you only get 4%+ Labour lead at the moment by stealing from Lib Dems and greens to a degree that looks unreal. I’ll add the fact the combined Lab, ldem, and green total has been dropping quite sharply recently, nearer just 50 now than 57. I’ll also throw in, in this yougov poll, reform + Tory = labour Behind?
I follow the aggregate Lab/Lib/Green share. It's important because in our polarized politics, with wedge issues and 'values' trumping more traditional debates around tax & spend, people having to choose a side even if they'd rather not, what we could be looking at at the next election is a bit of an American type 'trads v progs' situation, a binary fight where one of the 2 sides will prevail and form the government, Tories outright or Labour in a loose alliance.
That's the sort of election the Tories have in mind. They'll seek to paint Labour, in an impressionistic way rather than based on official policy positions, as unsafe on traditional values, and other parties on the centre left as enablers of this. This, plus "vote Starmer get Sturgeon" is going to be the Tory pitch. It's unedifying but they have no choice, really, because with their Brexitification, and the man they've embraced as leader, on most substantial issues they've become, not to put too fine a point on it, intellectually vacant.
I wonder if, when push comes to shove, a lot of 'Conservative' voters will be 'unable' to vote for the current PM & cabinet and simply stay at home.
I wonder that too. I wonder it very intensely!
We can get a handle on it from here. Let's see when the GE is upon us how many PB Tories, many of whom by that time will have written squillions of posts saying what a disgrace Johnson is, are nevertheless planning to 'hold their nose' because the prospect of a Labour government relying on SNP support is just *too* horrendous for words.
See, I'm getting pissed off already.
*Raises hand*
I don't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson. It's not his record - which I maintain is ok on the big stuff - I just don't want him as Prime Minister. But in all honesty I didn't want to vote for a Conservative Party led by Boris Johnson last time, and still did because the alternative was Corbyn. And actually, Boris has more than exceeded mylow expectations. If Boris was facing a nutter again I would be more likely to vote for him, not less.
But I'm almost certainly not going to vote Labour. They appear to be going for dully competent, but it's not apparent from this angle that they'd be doing anything better than the Conservatives. And they - and particularly my local MP - were far too pro-lockdown. But yes - while the prospect of PM Starmer is no worse than underwhelming, the prospect of deputy PM Blackford or Sturgeon IS too horrendous for words. I'm not against Scottish independence on principle, but I am against the SNP having a say in the governance of the UK. The SNP have absolutely no interest in a functioning United Kingdom- in fact, it is inimical to what they are trying to achieve - and to invite them to help govern England would be insane. Plus, aside from their constitutional position, they are pretty much diametrically opposite me politically.
See, Boris is a poor PM, but that is only one of a number of issues which needs weighing up. It's not, for me, unlike you I think, 'literally anyone but Boris' in the same way that the last election was 'literally anyone but Corbyn'.
Actually, I have the luxury of living in a safe seat, so I can vote for who I want, not against who I don't want (though I still voted Con last time because the slightest chance of keeping Corbyn out was worth taking). So I'd like to give the Lib Dems a good look - I liked the approach they took to the pandemic, and if the last two years have shown us anything it's that liberty can't be taken for granted. They're probably winning for me at the moment. Not least because But if they run another campaign like last time which felt like it was designed explicitly to alienate me I expect I'll go off them.
Obviously I'm not going to vote for the Green Party and barring anyone unexpectedly suitable turning up in Wythenshawe and Sale East probably not any of the other rag, tag and bobtail parties.
I can't see as Johnson has been getting lots of big calls right and I actually reckon Nicola Sturgeon is more concerned with improving the lives of people in England than he is. For her it's a deeply secondary matter, compared to all things Scotland, but with the limited bandwidth she has left she'd probably be up for it. For him it's not on the radar. It doesn't get a look in. It's 100% about himself.
But we all vote how we want for the reasons we have. Which is great really. And if you go for LD, having done the Bad Thing last time, it's a good sign as far as I'm concerned. It'll mean Con seats (even if not yours) are going to fall to the LDs in places which don't have it in them to elect a Labour MP. This is on the critical path to GTTO. If that aspect doesn't materialize, the LDs taking a bunch of such seats, we're looking at years more of Johnson and whatever this Tory Party thinks it is after Brexit and under him.
You should have a bit more humility having supported Corbyn last time. Seriously, imagine Ukraine with a Corbyn PM.
Hardly something to drench the sheets thinking about. We're bit players in this. The fact of the invasion wasn't influenced by who the British PM is and neither will be how it pans out.
UK equipment support has been significant and Corbyn would have disrupted NATO decision making but invited Putin for a cuppa.
Significant but in no way pivotal and I doubt all of that on Corbyn. He messed up on Salisbury but on the whole has a stronger anti-Putin back catalogue than many on the right of politics, inc many Tories. Goes right back to Chechnya. Furthermore, not so in thrall to Russian money as the guys we have in charge now. And he'd have probably been better on refugees too.
Anyway, none of this is provable either way. The notion that PM Corbyn cf PM Johnson would have made a material negative difference to the Ukraine war is imo just another example of what I call "Having Voted For Johnson Derangement Syndrome".
HVFJDS for short.
It's all an attempt to 'manage' the troubled deep interiors caused by being suckered by an arch conman. Self-respect is at stake. Because that's what conmen do - they strip their victims of that.
I think it is you who is in denial. Corbyn has just signed the Stop the War petition that blames the West for Russia's actions and effectively calls on Ukraine to stop resisting. I voted LD but would reluctantly have voted Tory to stop Corbyn. Corbyn as PM would have been a shocking historical event that you were prepared to risk.
PM Corbyn would have been a risk, no question. I'd have been a little nervous myself, if I'm honest, although my main problem with him was on absence of grey matter. I liked much of the policy platform and the values and rhetoric. But, c'mon, regardless of that, this notion that his hypothetical election would have made some big difference to this war is a massive massive stretch. It's just a bit of an odd thing to say imo.
And, ok, of course I'm bantering with the HVFJDS, and it sounds like you didn't, so I withdraw in your case, but as it becomes increasingly clear that we have a PM utterly unfit for office who the Tory Party are going to insist stands again, I have detected a great deal of this "but oh god, Corbyn" displacement activity from what I think are known in these parts as PB Tories.
Comments
In any case, Mr Johnson is alreadfy trying to shut Holyrood down without losing the nice jobs for his chums, by violating the Scotland Act, duplicating efforts, and ignoring the Sewel Convention.
In fact, he only returns to the fold on Thursdays.
She ain't gonna win.
It does bother me a bit when it comes from the usual comedians for whom everyone in certain parts of South Yorkshire are a stereotype.
I think the same factors apply to Finchley even more so with potential boundary changes taking in part of Hornsey and Wood Green.
https://twitter.com/Arslon_Xudosi/status/1509894185620549634
There's no guarantee that things would have turned out the same if we had a PM who regarded NATO as the root cause of the problem.
And virtually no masks - rather strange
Corbyn was what saw him leave Labour, Starmer is more in his mould.
On current polling I agree Labour rather than the LDs will likely take Cities of London and Westminster. Finchley should be a narrow Tory hold, again from Labour, probably will be the only Tory seat left in Barnet with Chipping Barnet and Hendon going Labour
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/our-work/news/ehrc-urges-fresh-start-critics-after-un-body-rejects-requests-review-its-status
The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has encouraged critics to reset relations after the UN body that assesses national human rights institutions rejected a request by campaigners to review the EHRC’s international accreditation.
The Global Alliance of National Human Rights Institutions, through the Sub-Committee on Accreditation (SCA), last week rejected a complaint by Stonewall and other groups who had questioned the EHRC’s independence and effectiveness and sought a special review of the EHRC’s ‘A Status’.
* This is quite unlike the covid rules where if you had one party as a student you would get a big fine, but if you have multiple parties as a PM you get off free.
https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1509904189853368323
With all due respect for fact that different people have differing motives and sincerity, I think we need both more investigation of COVID-19 origins and more careful thought about safety of work with potential pandemic pathogens....
I say this as someone who studies viral mutations and knows that virology (through vaccines) has probably saved more lives than any other biomedical field of study (except perhaps antibiotics)....
But if you think there is even a 1% chance that a lab accident caused a pandemic that's taken ~18 million lives (and given all the unknowns in China, I think chance is substantially higher), that should cause some serious introspection by all scientists....
Though there's an interesting piece in the i doing a survey of police forces and determining just how, erm, exceptional it is for a police force to investigate witnesses and possible culprits/violators by using an email questionnaire.
A vote for Labour is a threat to the Brexit you voted for, and turns back the clock on all Brexit gains and benefits we have made.
A vote for Labour is our defences neutralised, meaning we will all end up speaking Russian.”
“"And yes, it's an absolutely incredible fact - and it's true - at a time when Russia is being led by a president who is capable of bullying and threats, who's plainly capable of making dangerous and irrational decisions, we have a Labour Party, a Labour Party, whose shadow cabinet is stuffed with people who only recently voted to abolish the UK's independent nuclear deterrent. That's right. Eight of them.
"Do we want them in charge, my friends, at this moment? Do we want them running up the white flag? Do you see them standing up to Putin's blackmail?"
Imagine this from every Tory hustings and every Tory newspaper for a whole month. What makes Labour think they can top 230 seats let only 250? Getting those seats back the Corbyn madness threw away ain’t going to be quite as easy as so many hope for, is it?
What electoral facts do we have to go by? Labours last parliament by election gain? Labours vote share in council by elections is on the floor. Labour and Libdems even seem to be struggling in the governments mid term nadir. At no point have the midland marginals stopped loving Boris and Brexit, despite everything thrown at him.
Correct me where wrong, but brushing aside all the 80 seat majority, and the rest to stop Boris forming coalition government, doesn’t look on this mid term does it?
Something quite big and major needs to happen to change the direction this is inevitably travelling.
Seeking origins cannot be divorced at this point from pinning blame or avoiding being blamed. It can only result in the pushing of alternative truths and division within the scientific community based on national and other loyalties.
What is needed, and has already happened, is to consider ALL the ways in which COVID could have originated, and analyze how we can protect ourselves against each and every one of them going forward, or at least mitigate them to the extent possible.
I have said this from the very moment the US started pushing for the Wuhan investigation in a way that was antagonistic. And what did that WHO effort achieve of value? I'd argue is was worse than useless as it pushed China and its supporters into a defensive crouch, rather than a learning one.
Anyway, none of this is provable either way. The notion that PM Corbyn cf PM Johnson would have made a material negative difference to the Ukraine war is imo just another example of what I call "Having Voted For Johnson Derangement Syndrome".
HVFJDS for short.
It's all an attempt to 'manage' the troubled deep interiors caused by being suckered by an arch conman. Self-respect is at stake. Because that's what conmen do - they strip their victims of that.
Macron 54%
Le Pen 46%
Macron 58%
Melenchon 42%
https://twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1509903006988447771?s=20&t=e_qU2QS1Y-EPs5tw27IH7Q
He appears to have quite a lot on common with your views.
I think it's unrealistic to expect people to stop enquiring about Covid origins, which is why such an effort needs responsible voices.
But, frankly, not of Corbyn. His basic premise is that the wrong side won the Cold War. He is profoundly anti-American and hates NATO.
To say he "messed up" on Salisbury and just dismiss it is laughable. His approach to that tells you all you need to know about him.
He was a very, very precise individual. Everything had to be done by process, and the process had to be well thought out and defined.
Exactly who you wanted in LNG plant operations, apparently.
EDIT - I think my thought process with the photo is that when people muck around with explosives, sooner or later an actual adult has to tidy up after them.
@IAPonomarenko
·
1h
Basically, Russian military presence northwest, west, and east of Kyiv has just ceased to exist.
The Ukrainian forces have regained control of all key points, including Borodyanka and Ivankiv,
Ukrainian forces are cleaning up Bucha, Vorzel and Hostomel.
NY Times blog
31st March 2022
An investigation has begun and the councillor will no longer be seeking re-election, according to the council's Labour group leader
A Labour councillor in Wandsworth has been suspended by the party and prevented from seeking re-election on 5 May after writing on Twitter that Chancellor Rishi Sunak “should go back to India with his billionaire wife”. Peter Carpenter, who currently represents the West Hill ward, has deleted his Twitter account, but not before the tweet, which also described Sunak, who was born in Southampton to Indian parents, as “a complete waste of space”, attracted a complaint."
https://www.onlondon.co.uk/wandsworth-labour-councillor-suspended-for-go-back-to-india-tweet-about-rishi-sunak/
As Putin approaches his 70th birthday, he is attended by a brigade of doctors including Yevgeny Selivanov, an oncology surgeon who specialises in thyroid cancer, according to Proyekt, a Russian investigative journalism group.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/cancer-surgeon-visited-putin-35-times-in-four-years-gkflcsvfg
Yes, there's "no guarantee" that if Labour had won GE19 Ukraine wouldn't now be fully occupied by Russia - but going any further than this triggers a diagnosis from me of HVFJDS.
Hey, that's uncomfortably close to HYUFD, isn't it? Just realized that.
By contesting all seats the centre left make it surer the Tories will win.
The SNP will, obvs, never support the Tories and would generally back a nonTory coalition, who could firm up the SNP support by pledging to support IndyRef2 at any time apart from the present moment or immediate future, thus agreeing with Nichola's extremely effective policy to keep all the jobs she can for the SNP boys and girls in perpetuity.
I can't discern the accent however.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZEMg22kalE
This feels like another attempt by the scientific establishment to protect their Chinese funding arrangements.
Mathematically the chance of an outright Labour win (326 seats) are tiny (despite the 4/1 being offered). But the chance of the Tories falling below their critical number (it is about 317?) remain mathematically high. They have for the moment lost the north.
This indicates to me that the alchemy of elections is likely to produce either a Tory majority or a centre left alliance which the LDs will have the power to make or break. I give each outcome an equal chance at the moment.
https://twitter.com/cdbeaton/status/1509867494038818848?s=21&t=6BMhWesTCj_v4M5pT8_lVA
No doubt there are some who have egg on their faces for whom wrapping this all up would be convenient. But that still would not make pushing more investigations either right or useful.
And, ok, of course I'm bantering with the HVFJDS, and it sounds like you didn't, so I withdraw in your case, but as it becomes increasingly clear that we have a PM utterly unfit for office who the Tory Party are going to insist stands again, I have detected a great deal of this "but oh god, Corbyn" displacement activity from what I think are known in these parts as PB Tories.