Johnson was right to go to Ukraine. There's a war on.
And his going there (again) has helped how, exactly?
We all know he's only gone there because he's scared to campaign in the by-elections, and he needed a distraction from Geidt.
Very odd storty that Mr J has got Mr Williamson (of spider fame) to step down at next election so Mr J can have his safe seat rather than Uxbridge. NO idea if it is true.
3/4 I made it clear to them that I never had any such discussion with him or anyone close to him and the idea that I would stand down from doing the job I love so much is detached from reality. Despite this, I have been informed that they still intend to run this false story.
or anyone close to him: why not say, or anyone at all?
Picking a leader because they are a woman rather than on merit gives you Julia Gillard, Theresa May, Kim Campbell or Valerie Pecresse or Edith Cresson or Kezia Dugale. If Streeting is the best candidate in a future Labour leadership election he is the best candidate.
In any case we have already had a woman PM but not had an openly homosexual PM like Streeting
May was chosen on merit.
Not her merit, mind, but that of her opponents
I believe very strongly that had her opponent been selected, we'd have enjoyed a far more fruitful time politically since then than we did.
Because Leadsom was able to reach across both party lines and the bitterness created by the referendum, and could forge a united view on Brexit?
Not seeing it myself, but it's good to have a view.
I think I agree with @Luckyguy1983, but for different reasons.
May would have won, because Leadsom was clearly mad and deluded. After all, the Conservative Party wasn't as Brexit Puritan then as it became.
And having won in a real (but unbalanced) fight, May would have been in a stronger position to push her vision through. Winning by default weakened her.
Biggest mistake Theresa May made when she became party leader and PM was to sack George Osborne in the petty way she did, she should have kept him in a senior role in Cabinet and sacked her two closest advisers instead. Osborne was far more politically astute than those two put together..
Johnson was right to go to Ukraine. There's a war on.
And his going there (again) has helped how, exactly?
We all know he's only gone there because he's scared to campaign in the by-elections, and he needed a distraction from Geidt.
Quite obviously so. He didn't want to be booed by the NRG for saying "you're on your own, there's no money"
No need for the PM to go, it isn't as if he has any grasp of detail, that needs Wallace for policy, and some senior MoD and Army staff for the details.
Think of Kyiv as a very large fridge to hide in.
A bit like Andy the nonce having to fly to NY and explain over 4 days why Brian couldn't be his friend any more
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
Johnson was right to go to Ukraine. There's a war on.
And his going there (again) has helped how, exactly?
We all know he's only gone there because he's scared to campaign in the by-elections, and he needed a distraction from Geidt.
Quite obviously so. He didn't want to be booed by the NRG for saying "you're on your own, there's no money"
No need for the PM to go, it isn't as if he has any grasp of detail, that needs Wallace for policy, and some senior MoD and Army staff for the details.
Think of Kyiv as a very large fridge to hide in.
A bit like Andy the nonce having to fly to NY and explain over 4 days why Brian couldn't be his friend any more
Or Johnson disappearing to Afghanistan on a jolly rather than vote on the Heathrow expansion. He has form.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
Johnson was right to go to Ukraine. There's a war on.
And his going there (again) has helped how, exactly?
We all know he's only gone there because he's scared to campaign in the by-elections, and he needed a distraction from Geidt.
Quite obviously so. He didn't want to be booed by the NRG for saying "you're on your own, there's no money"
No need for the PM to go to Ukraine, it isn't as if he has any grasp of detail, that needs Wallace for policy, and some senior MoD and Army staff for the details.
Think of Kyiv as a very large fridge to hide in.
Or alternatively, he was agreeing of the training offer announced today, and similar stuff?
I know top bods in all organisations go on jollies, but there are definitely times when face-to-face meetings are needed. And I'm far from convinced that Ukraine is the first place someone would choose to go at the moment if they wanted a safer space...
Picking a leader because they are a woman rather than on merit gives you Julia Gillard, Theresa May, Kim Campbell or Valerie Pecresse or Edith Cresson or Kezia Dugale. If Streeting is the best candidate in a future Labour leadership election he is the best candidate.
In any case we have already had a woman PM but not had an openly homosexual PM like Streeting
May was chosen on merit.
Not her merit, mind, but that of her opponents
I believe very strongly that had her opponent been selected, we'd have enjoyed a far more fruitful time politically since then than we did.
Because Leadsom was able to reach across both party lines and the bitterness created by the referendum, and could forge a united view on Brexit?
Not seeing it myself, but it's good to have a view.
I think I agree with @Luckyguy1983, but for different reasons.
May would have won, because Leadsom was clearly mad and deluded. After all, the Conservative Party wasn't as Brexit Puritan then as it became.
And having won in a real (but unbalanced) fight, May would have been in a stronger position to push her vision through. Winning by default weakened her.
Since she held down several Ministerial positions subsequently, and is still a respected MP, I think it's pretty clear that 'mad and deluded' here translates fairly simply as 'opposed to my own world view'. Reading on to find apparently unironic references to May and 'vision' on the same sentence, I'm not really sure what to engage with here in terms of a serious argument. I am not one of the lady's detractors - she did her best, but visionary she was not. And in the end she was cruelly found wanting.
When you say "held down", what do you mean?
She was shunted pretty sharpish from every appointment, no? Moved to ever more ceremonial roles until she was back on the backbenches.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
Nah, a Labour minority government having demolished a Conservative government would win a quick second election like Wilson did in 1966, whilst in a honeymoon period.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
A GE doesn't "avoid" the privileges committee, it merely means it will happen after a GE surely?
I guess it might neuter the result of that committee if Johnson wins a decent majority again. What ever they come up with the 1922 wont get the letters by that point?
Biden's insistence that his stimulus had no impact on inflation is hard to believe. Even his own administration has acknowledged it, but it looks like it has become political poison for the Democrats.
Johnson was right to go to Ukraine. There's a war on.
And his going there (again) has helped how, exactly?
We all know he's only gone there because he's scared to campaign in the by-elections, and he needed a distraction from Geidt.
Quite obviously so. He didn't want to be booed by the NRG for saying "you're on your own, there's no money"
No need for the PM to go, it isn't as if he has any grasp of detail, that needs Wallace for policy, and some senior MoD and Army staff for the details.
Think of Kyiv as a very large fridge to hide in.
A bit like Andy the nonce having to fly to NY and explain over 4 days why Brian couldn't be his friend any more
Didn't fat boy fly to Afghanistan to avoid voting on Heathrow? Similar pattern of behaviour.
Johnson was right to go to Ukraine. There's a war on.
And his going there (again) has helped how, exactly?
We all know he's only gone there because he's scared to campaign in the by-elections, and he needed a distraction from Geidt.
Quite obviously so. He didn't want to be booed by the NRG for saying "you're on your own, there's no money"
No need for the PM to go to Ukraine, it isn't as if he has any grasp of detail, that needs Wallace for policy, and some senior MoD and Army staff for the details.
Think of Kyiv as a very large fridge to hide in.
Or alternatively, he was agreeing of the training offer announced today, and similar stuff?
I know top bods in all organisations go on jollies, but there are definitely times when face-to-face meetings are needed. And I'm far from convinced that Ukraine is the first place someone would choose to go at the moment if they wanted a safer space...
Very convenient to do it today so he couldn't make the NRG conference. Why not go at the weekend, or last weekend?
@BWallaceMP So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane .
2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation.
3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that.
in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane.
Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
I don't think this is impossible. But it must be less likely if the Tories get hammered in T and H. A result like Shropshire would not be great for election 2022 prospects, though Tory MPs/party would do well to despatch Boris quickly (don't hold your breath, having already missed the big chance, they really are that craven and useless.)
But something tells me that T and H is not home and dry for the LDs. It seems to me about 70/30. I just slightly wonder if Labour will accidentally split the vote enough, unlike Shropshire, to let the Tories hold on.
Twitter Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP United Kingdom government official So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane . 1/5
Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP·5m United Kingdom government official Replying to @BWallaceMP 2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation. 2/5
Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP·6m United Kingdom government official 3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that 3/5
Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP·7m United Kingdom government official in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane. 4/5
Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP·7m United Kingdom government official Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks. 5/5
@BWallaceMP So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane .
2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation.
3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that.
in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane.
Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks.
Wallace is Johnson's bitch. See his volte face on interference in the Kabul operation. Ignore , and the slur on GCHQ ability to encrypt a phone conversation.
@BWallaceMP So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane .
2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation.
3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that.
in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane.
Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
During WWII, the ability to train aircrew in Canada and the US, in peace and quiet, was extremely important for the UK.
One of the reasons that Downing was confident during the Battle of Britain, was that the Canadian pipeline was accelerating. And providing properly trained pilots. Not the 10 hour victims of WWI.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
Nah, a Labour minority government having demolished a Conservative government would win a quick second election like Wilson did in 1966, whilst in a honeymoon period.
Not with inflation in double digits, and Wilson had a majority albeit tiny. A bit different to being 50 to 75 seats short of a majority and running an unstable minority
@BWallaceMP So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane .
2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation.
3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that.
in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane.
Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks.
Wallace is Johnson's bitch. See his volte face on interference in the Kabul operation. Ignore , and the slur on GCHQ ability to encrypt a phone conversation.
The whole thing is just an insult to the intelligence. They must think we are fucking morons.
@BWallaceMP So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane .
2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation.
3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that.
in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane.
Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Do we have any idea what the training rate was for the US/UK program, previous to the war? It was supposed to have trained a large chunk of the pre war Ukranain Army.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
If Labour is close enough to command a majority with confidence and supply from the SNP and the Liberal Democrats (i.e. without having to spend most of their time pacifying the little bits and pieces, and I'm thinking especially about Northern Irish complications here,) then I think they can make it work. The SNP can't bring down a Labour Government because of their long-held position of vehement opposition to Evil Tories, and the Lib Dems would obviously far prefer to work with Labour.
The two big issues that a Labour minority then has to get to grips with are:
1. How does it govern effectively if the SNP continues to observe a self-denying ordinance on legislation not applicable in Scotland, and this has the consequence of creating a Conservative majority in the Commons on such matters? 2. Would Labour have the confidence to believe that it can win an election under FPTP at any time in the near future - and if not, would it contemplate using electoral reform as an instrument to thwart another Tory majority a couple of years down the line?
The answer to the first question is that it can't, so the Parliament wouldn't last anything like a full term. The answer to the second question is the great unknowable. If Labour's MPs conclude that it's in their interest to adopt PR then that changes everything: they wouldn't need to operate a wobbly administration for five years, they could put the relevant legislation in their first Queen's Speech and have it on the statute book in a few months (or just over a year at the very maximum if the House of Lords vetoed it, which they most likely wouldn't,) and then go back to the country to sort the mess out. That, needless to say, would change just about everything.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
Johnson was right to go to Ukraine. There's a war on.
And his going there (again) has helped how, exactly?
We all know he's only gone there because he's scared to campaign in the by-elections, and he needed a distraction from Geidt.
Quite obviously so. He didn't want to be booed by the NRG for saying "you're on your own, there's no money"
No need for the PM to go to Ukraine, it isn't as if he has any grasp of detail, that needs Wallace for policy, and some senior MoD and Army staff for the details.
Think of Kyiv as a very large fridge to hide in.
Or alternatively, he was agreeing of the training offer announced today, and similar stuff?
I know top bods in all organisations go on jollies, but there are definitely times when face-to-face meetings are needed. And I'm far from convinced that Ukraine is the first place someone would choose to go at the moment if they wanted a safer space...
Very convenient to do it today so he couldn't make the NRG conference. Why not go at the weekend, or last weekend?
Well, Zelensky's rather busy atm. It's not just up to Johnson about when he can go.
Wallace may be an idiot, but he's right that people are making asses out of themselves over this.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
I don't think this is impossible. But it must be less likely if the Tories get hammered in T and H. A result like Shropshire would not be great for election 2022 prospects, though Tory MPs/party would do well to despatch Boris quickly (don't hold your breath, having already missed the big chance, they really are that craven and useless.)
But something tells me that T and H is not home and dry for the LDs. It seems to me about 70/30. I just slightly wonder if Labour will accidentally split the vote enough, unlike Shropshire, to let the Tories hold on.
With you on this - can a Labour brexit voter ever vote for the Lib Dems? - unless of course they hate Boris so much.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
Johnson was right to go to Ukraine. There's a war on.
And his going there (again) has helped how, exactly?
We all know he's only gone there because he's scared to campaign in the by-elections, and he needed a distraction from Geidt.
Quite obviously so. He didn't want to be booed by the NRG for saying "you're on your own, there's no money"
No need for the PM to go to Ukraine, it isn't as if he has any grasp of detail, that needs Wallace for policy, and some senior MoD and Army staff for the details.
Think of Kyiv as a very large fridge to hide in.
Or alternatively, he was agreeing of the training offer announced today, and similar stuff?
I know top bods in all organisations go on jollies, but there are definitely times when face-to-face meetings are needed. And I'm far from convinced that Ukraine is the first place someone would choose to go at the moment if they wanted a safer space...
Very convenient to do it today so he couldn't make the NRG conference. Why not go at the weekend, or last weekend?
Well, Zelensky's rather busy atm. It's not just up to Johnson about when he can go.
Wallace may be an idiot, but he's right that people are making asses out of themselves over this.
It's absolutely up to Johnson if he's stumping up on our behalf for all that training.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
Nah, a Labour minority government having demolished a Conservative government would win a quick second election like Wilson did in 1966, whilst in a honeymoon period.
Not with inflation in double digits, and Wilson had a majority albeit tiny. A bit different to being 50 to 75 seats short of a majority and running an unstable minority
Yes, but able to blame the Tories for the economic crisis, and having gained 80 odd seats would win an election 6 months later.
We haven't had a government that lasted less than five years since 1974, and that was the exception of the postwar period. The British electorate doesn't want to change, then change back a few months later.
I am sure @ydoethur could let us know when the last time a LOTO formed a government, then lost power less than a couple of years later. Was it Ramsey Macdonald in the mid Twenties?
@BWallaceMP So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane .
2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation.
3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that.
in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane.
Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks.
Wallace is Johnson's bitch. See his volte face on interference in the Kabul operation. Ignore , and the slur on GCHQ ability to encrypt a phone conversation.
The whole thing is just an insult to the intelligence. They must think we are fucking morons.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
I don't think this is impossible. But it must be less likely if the Tories get hammered in T and H. A result like Shropshire would not be great for election 2022 prospects, though Tory MPs/party would do well to despatch Boris quickly (don't hold your breath, having already missed the big chance, they really are that craven and useless.)
But something tells me that T and H is not home and dry for the LDs. It seems to me about 70/30. I just slightly wonder if Labour will accidentally split the vote enough, unlike Shropshire, to let the Tories hold on.
With you on this - can a Labour brexit voter ever vote for the Lib Dems? - unless of course they hate Boris so much.
I don't think the three Labour Brexit voters in T&H will make that much of a dent in the LD's total, tbh.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Do we have any idea what the training rate was for the US/UK program, previous to the war? It was supposed to have trained a large chunk of the pre war Ukranain Army.
We trained 22 000 over 7 years according to the MoD press release.
Picking a leader because they are a woman rather than on merit gives you Julia Gillard, Theresa May, Kim Campbell or Valerie Pecresse or Edith Cresson or Kezia Dugale. If Streeting is the best candidate in a future Labour leadership election he is the best candidate.
In any case we have already had a woman PM but not had an openly homosexual PM like Streeting
May was chosen on merit.
Not her merit, mind, but that of her opponents
I believe very strongly that had her opponent been selected, we'd have enjoyed a far more fruitful time politically since then than we did.
Because Leadsom was able to reach across both party lines and the bitterness created by the referendum, and could forge a united view on Brexit?
Not seeing it myself, but it's good to have a view.
I think I agree with @Luckyguy1983, but for different reasons.
May would have won, because Leadsom was clearly mad and deluded. After all, the Conservative Party wasn't as Brexit Puritan then as it became.
And having won in a real (but unbalanced) fight, May would have been in a stronger position to push her vision through. Winning by default weakened her.
Since she held down several Ministerial positions subsequently, and is still a respected MP, I think it's pretty clear that 'mad and deluded' here translates fairly simply as 'opposed to my own world view'. Reading on to find apparently unironic references to May and 'vision' on the same sentence, I'm not really sure what to engage with here in terms of a serious argument. I am not one of the lady's detractors - she did her best, but visionary she was not. And in the end she was cruelly found wanting.
When you say "held down", what do you mean?
She was shunted pretty sharpish from every appointment, no? Moved to ever more ceremonial roles until she was back on the backbenches.
1. Are you arguing that the woman is insane? If not, I'm not sure why you're arguing. She held down several posts and was afaik not removed from any of them for being anything less than A1 mentally capable. 2. I find it funny how people who profess no admiration for Johnson's judgement in Ministerial appointments (quite the opposite), suddently flip to highlighting lack of advancement in his cabinet as a valid criticism of someone's abilities. It's Dura Ace's main criticism of Mordaunt that she's not a shining star in the firmament of Boris's inner circle. Now it's apparently a criticism of Leadsom that she's not the current Jacob Rees Mogg.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Do we have any idea what the training rate was for the US/UK program, previous to the war? It was supposed to have trained a large chunk of the pre war Ukranain Army.
We trained 22 000 over 7 years according to the MoD press release.
But this will probably be a very different form of training; perhaps equivalent to the basic TA training.
Give them a safe place to learn how not to shoot their own feet off.
It probably won't be teaching them the more specialist stuff.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
@BWallaceMP So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane .
2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation.
3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that.
in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane.
Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks.
Mr Clarke can be added to the list of well-remunerated suits, including the Prime Minister and the Governor of the Bank of England, who can be told to get knotted. Struggling businesses may need to ask their employees to burden share, but profitable ones and the public sector should both be paying decent wage settlements. The former can pay for it by paying out lower dividends; the latter can do so if the Government taxes the well-off properly.
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
Twitter alexmassie@alexmassie·2h I don’t care if the prime minister’s trip to Ukraine today is cynical or opportunistic; on this issue he has said and, importantly, *done* many of the right things. It should be possible to recognise this while still thinking him a dreadful, unfit, PM.
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
I'd rather have the "Atlantic crap" thank you very much. 30°C+ conditions are fit for nothing except sitting somewhere shady with a fan constantly on and a cold drink. An inconvenience for a day, a miserable endurance trial if it goes on for weeks.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That will probably be different courses. It sounds like this one is taking civilians and teaching them the basics.
Let's run some numbers. If we round three weeks to 20 days, then there are six cadres in the 120 days. 10,000 soldiers divided by 6 is about 1,600 people being trained at any one time.
According to (1), we had 17,000 people join the military in a year - though not all will be the army. If basic training is about 20 weeks, then we probably have the capability to train 1,600 extra - though we may have to cut our own intake, or
It certainly sniffs as though it is doable, but costly.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
If Labour is close enough to command a majority with confidence and supply from the SNP and the Liberal Democrats (i.e. without having to spend most of their time pacifying the little bits and pieces, and I'm thinking especially about Northern Irish complications here,) then I think they can make it work. The SNP can't bring down a Labour Government because of their long-held position of vehement opposition to Evil Tories, and the Lib Dems would obviously far prefer to work with Labour.
The two big issues that a Labour minority then has to get to grips with are:
1. How does it govern effectively if the SNP continues to observe a self-denying ordinance on legislation not applicable in Scotland, and this has the consequence of creating a Conservative majority in the Commons on such matters? 2. Would Labour have the confidence to believe that it can win an election under FPTP at any time in the near future - and if not, would it contemplate using electoral reform as an instrument to thwart another Tory majority a couple of years down the line?
The answer to the first question is that it can't, so the Parliament wouldn't last anything like a full term. The answer to the second question is the great unknowable. If Labour's MPs conclude that it's in their interest to adopt PR then that changes everything: they wouldn't need to operate a wobbly administration for five years, they could put the relevant legislation in their first Queen's Speech and have it on the statute book in a few months (or just over a year at the very maximum if the House of Lords vetoed it, which they most likely wouldn't,) and then go back to the country to sort the mess out. That, needless to say, would change just about everything.
In respect of PR, very unlikely they'd try and implement without a referendum and any change will require a few years (min 2 to 3) work with the electoral commission given that it requires redoing the boundaries completely. Their own MPs would be voting a chunk of themselves out of a job and if not a manifesto commitment a chunk would vote against and the SNP have nothing to gain from PR at the moment, it would lose them a lot of representation. The closer labour are to majority the easier but the less the need. If it looks like it might succeed i could see the Tories going for a compromise. Bulk FPTP with 100 top ups a la Holyrood/Sennedd as a spoiler to being permanently locked out
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
I'd rather have the "Atlantic crap" thank you very much. 30°C+ conditions are fit for nothing except sitting somewhere shady with a fan constantly on and a cold drink. An inconvenience for a day, a miserable endurance trial if it goes on for weeks.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
I don't think this is impossible. But it must be less likely if the Tories get hammered in T and H. A result like Shropshire would not be great for election 2022 prospects, though Tory MPs/party would do well to despatch Boris quickly (don't hold your breath, having already missed the big chance, they really are that craven and useless.)
But something tells me that T and H is not home and dry for the LDs. It seems to me about 70/30. I just slightly wonder if Labour will accidentally split the vote enough, unlike Shropshire, to let the Tories hold on.
With you on this - can a Labour brexit voter ever vote for the Lib Dems? - unless of course they hate Boris so much.
I don't think the three Labour Brexit voters in T&H will make that much of a dent in the LD's total, tbh.
You should be right but it's the local election results ( I know I know) where the results just don't seem to reflect the Opinion Polls - last night for example the Tories had their best results for some time and its throwing my calculations
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
Santon Downham often gets mentioned for this sort of thing, and it's a lovely place.
Thetford Warren Lodge is nearby: a tower built to protect gamekeepers from poachers wanting rabbits!
Twitter alexmassie@alexmassie·2h I don’t care if the prime minister’s trip to Ukraine today is cynical or opportunistic; on this issue he has said and, importantly, *done* many of the right things. It should be possible to recognise this while still thinking him a dreadful, unfit, PM.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
Nah, a Labour minority government having demolished a Conservative government would win a quick second election like Wilson did in 1966, whilst in a honeymoon period.
Not with inflation in double digits, and Wilson had a majority albeit tiny. A bit different to being 50 to 75 seats short of a majority and running an unstable minority
Yes, but able to blame the Tories for the economic crisis, and having gained 80 odd seats would win an election 6 months later.
We haven't had a government that lasted less than five years since 1974, and that was the exception of the postwar period. The British electorate doesn't want to change, then change back a few months later.
I am sure @ydoethur could let us know when the last time a LOTO formed a government, then lost power less than a couple of years later. Was it Ramsey Macdonald in the mid Twenties?
I don't think they would but the exact circumstances have never occured. Closest analogy is MacDonald minority that got crushed, Wilson 74 worked but he was larger party in february and BJ won from minority but as an almost majority in unique circs. Nobody in the last 100 years has lost to a larger party, formed a minority and gone on to win 6 months later/soon after If hes the larger party hes laughing
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That doesn't seem to be this brief though, and is also obviously equipment specific so needs to be done by appropriate specialists.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
If Labour is close enough to command a majority with confidence and supply from the SNP and the Liberal Democrats (i.e. without having to spend most of their time pacifying the little bits and pieces, and I'm thinking especially about Northern Irish complications here,) then I think they can make it work. The SNP can't bring down a Labour Government because of their long-held position of vehement opposition to Evil Tories, and the Lib Dems would obviously far prefer to work with Labour.
The two big issues that a Labour minority then has to get to grips with are:
1. How does it govern effectively if the SNP continues to observe a self-denying ordinance on legislation not applicable in Scotland, and this has the consequence of creating a Conservative majority in the Commons on such matters? 2. Would Labour have the confidence to believe that it can win an election under FPTP at any time in the near future - and if not, would it contemplate using electoral reform as an instrument to thwart another Tory majority a couple of years down the line?
The answer to the first question is that it can't, so the Parliament wouldn't last anything like a full term. The answer to the second question is the great unknowable. If Labour's MPs conclude that it's in their interest to adopt PR then that changes everything: they wouldn't need to operate a wobbly administration for five years, they could put the relevant legislation in their first Queen's Speech and have it on the statute book in a few months (or just over a year at the very maximum if the House of Lords vetoed it, which they most likely wouldn't,) and then go back to the country to sort the mess out. That, needless to say, would change just about everything.
In respect of PR, very unlikely they'd try and implement without a referendum and any change will require a few years (min 2 to 3) work with the electoral commission given that it requires redoing the boundaries completely. Their own MPs would be voting a chunk of themselves out of a job and if not a manifesto commitment a chunk would vote against and the SNP have nothing to gain from PR at the moment, it would lose them a lot of representation. The closer labour are to majority the easier but the less the need. If it looks like it might succeed i could see the Tories going for a compromise. Bulk FPTP with 100 top ups a la Holyrood/Sennedd as a spoiler to being permanently locked out
A Labour bloc of around 250 MPs wouldn't necessarily be voting for mass unemployment by going for a change of system; what they would probably be voting for is an opportunity to spend less time in opposition and more time in government.
I don't think that a referendum is necessarily a barrier to reform. The Conservative Party has sprayed excrement all over its brand, especially with regard to probity and respect for the rules - if they whine about change being introduced without a plebiscite (and, Lord alone knows, we've already had enough referendums to last a lifetime,) then they're on distinctly shaky ground.
Your point about the need to sort out the mechanics and draw up new boundaries is, however, well made. I should've thought of that myself. Labour probably would need to last somewhere close to a full term to get the job done, so that brings us back to whether or not the Parliamentary arithmetic in situations where they can't rely on the SNP for help will add up for them.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That will probably be different courses. It sounds like this one is taking civilians and teaching them the basics.
Let's run some numbers. If we round three weeks to 20 days, then there are six cadres in the 120 days. 10,000 soldiers divided by 6 is about 1,600 people being trained at any one time.
According to (1), we had 17,000 people join the military in a year - though not all will be the army. If basic training is about 20 weeks, then we probably have the capability to train 1,600 extra - though we may have to cut our own intake, or
It certainly sniffs as though it is doable, but costly.
Twitter alexmassie@alexmassie·2h I don’t care if the prime minister’s trip to Ukraine today is cynical or opportunistic; on this issue he has said and, importantly, *done* many of the right things. It should be possible to recognise this while still thinking him a dreadful, unfit, PM.
Like saying he has not defecated on the dispatch box during pmqs. He is a corrupt lump of shit who would sell the entire population of Ukraine down the Don if it furthered his career, and I am very worried by people like Alex and you who clearly still want to believe and are desperately grateful for a crumb like his hoicking his fat arse to kyiv for a day.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That will probably be different courses. It sounds like this one is taking civilians and teaching them the basics.
Let's run some numbers. If we round three weeks to 20 days, then there are six cadres in the 120 days. 10,000 soldiers divided by 6 is about 1,600 people being trained at any one time.
According to (1), we had 17,000 people join the military in a year - though not all will be the army. If basic training is about 20 weeks, then we probably have the capability to train 1,600 extra - though we may have to cut our own intake, or
It certainly sniffs as though it is doable, but costly.
What language is going to be used to train these thousands of troops?
Interpretive dance. Seriously, trained to fight is English; taught battle winning skills for the front line is the prospectus for a corporate team building outfit.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That doesn't seem to be this brief though, and is also obviously equipment specific so needs to be done by appropriate specialists.
Totally agree, I was just throwing that observation into the mix.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That will probably be different courses. It sounds like this one is taking civilians and teaching them the basics.
Let's run some numbers. If we round three weeks to 20 days, then there are six cadres in the 120 days. 10,000 soldiers divided by 6 is about 1,600 people being trained at any one time.
According to (1), we had 17,000 people join the military in a year - though not all will be the army. If basic training is about 20 weeks, then we probably have the capability to train 1,600 extra - though we may have to cut our own intake, or
It certainly sniffs as though it is doable, but costly.
What language is going to be used to train these thousands of troops?
Ukrainian, at a guess. which means we will probably train the trainers (ones that know both Ukrainian and English, hopefully), who can then train their troops at our facilities, with our bods watching on.
It seems reasonable enough. If you want it to be done, it will be done.
And the language issue would be there wherever they train outside of Ukraine.
(As an aside, some/many will speak Russian as well. That might be interesting...)
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That will probably be different courses. It sounds like this one is taking civilians and teaching them the basics.
Let's run some numbers. If we round three weeks to 20 days, then there are six cadres in the 120 days. 10,000 soldiers divided by 6 is about 1,600 people being trained at any one time.
According to (1), we had 17,000 people join the military in a year - though not all will be the army. If basic training is about 20 weeks, then we probably have the capability to train 1,600 extra - though we may have to cut our own intake, or
It certainly sniffs as though it is doable, but costly.
What language is going to be used to train these thousands of troops?
Ukrainian, at a guess. which means we will probably train the trainers (ones that know both Ukrainian and English, hopefully), who can then train their troops at our facilities, with our bods watching on.
It seems reasonable enough. If you want it to be done, it will be done.
And the language issue would be there wherever they train outside of Ukraine.
(As an aside, some/many will speak Russian as well. That might be interesting...)
Aren't the Russian and Ukrainian languages mutually intelligible?
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
Nah, a Labour minority government having demolished a Conservative government would win a quick second election like Wilson did in 1966, whilst in a honeymoon period.
Not with inflation in double digits, and Wilson had a majority albeit tiny. A bit different to being 50 to 75 seats short of a majority and running an unstable minority
Yes, but able to blame the Tories for the economic crisis, and having gained 80 odd seats would win an election 6 months later.
We haven't had a government that lasted less than five years since 1974, and that was the exception of the postwar period. The British electorate doesn't want to change, then change back a few months later.
I am sure @ydoethur could let us know when the last time a LOTO formed a government, then lost power less than a couple of years later. Was it Ramsey Macdonald in the mid Twenties?
I don't think they would but the exact circumstances have never occured. Closest analogy is MacDonald minority that got crushed, Wilson 74 worked but he was larger party in february and BJ won from minority but as an almost majority in unique circs. Nobody in the last 100 years has lost to a larger party, formed a minority and gone on to win 6 months later/soon after If hes the larger party hes laughing
Yes, but nobody has lost from that scenario either.
Con 290 ish and uncoalitionable, Lab on 250 ish (which would mean significant Lab gains) is a unknown quantity, but my money would be on a further election within the year, where Labour gains more seats (like Wilson '66 and Oct '74) is more plausible than losing them back.
IMO if the Tories fall below 300, they are out for a decade. That is how long voters give a new government, as a minimum.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
If Labour is close enough to command a majority with confidence and supply from the SNP and the Liberal Democrats (i.e. without having to spend most of their time pacifying the little bits and pieces, and I'm thinking especially about Northern Irish complications here,) then I think they can make it work. The SNP can't bring down a Labour Government because of their long-held position of vehement opposition to Evil Tories, and the Lib Dems would obviously far prefer to work with Labour.
The two big issues that a Labour minority then has to get to grips with are:
1. How does it govern effectively if the SNP continues to observe a self-denying ordinance on legislation not applicable in Scotland, and this has the consequence of creating a Conservative majority in the Commons on such matters? 2. Would Labour have the confidence to believe that it can win an election under FPTP at any time in the near future - and if not, would it contemplate using electoral reform as an instrument to thwart another Tory majority a couple of years down the line?
The answer to the first question is that it can't, so the Parliament wouldn't last anything like a full term. The answer to the second question is the great unknowable. If Labour's MPs conclude that it's in their interest to adopt PR then that changes everything: they wouldn't need to operate a wobbly administration for five years, they could put the relevant legislation in their first Queen's Speech and have it on the statute book in a few months (or just over a year at the very maximum if the House of Lords vetoed it, which they most likely wouldn't,) and then go back to the country to sort the mess out. That, needless to say, would change just about everything.
In respect of PR, very unlikely they'd try and implement without a referendum and any change will require a few years (min 2 to 3) work with the electoral commission given that it requires redoing the boundaries completely. Their own MPs would be voting a chunk of themselves out of a job and if not a manifesto commitment a chunk would vote against and the SNP have nothing to gain from PR at the moment, it would lose them a lot of representation. The closer labour are to majority the easier but the less the need. If it looks like it might succeed i could see the Tories going for a compromise. Bulk FPTP with 100 top ups a la Holyrood/Sennedd as a spoiler to being permanently locked out
A Labour bloc of around 250 MPs wouldn't necessarily be voting for mass unemployment by going for a change of system; what they would probably be voting for is an opportunity to spend less time in opposition and more time in government.
I don't think that a referendum is necessarily a barrier to reform. The Conservative Party has sprayed excrement all over its brand, especially with regard to probity and respect for the rules - if they whine about change being introduced without a plebiscite (and, Lord alone knows, we've already had enough referendums to last a lifetime,) then they're on distinctly shaky ground.
Your point about the need to sort out the mechanics and draw up new boundaries is, however, well made. I should've thought of that myself. Labour probably would need to last somewhere close to a full term to get the job done, so that brings us back to whether or not the Parliamentary arithmetic in situations where they can't rely on the SNP for help will add up for them.
The Lords might be more of an obstacle if its not a manifesto committment and of course if Labour dont say they are committing in a manifesto, and cone into government in a crisis and the first thing they do is decide to implement a change to their long term electoral advantage that would be 'brave' politically If its not in their manifesto i think its not happening
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That doesn't seem to be this brief though, and is also obviously equipment specific so needs to be done by appropriate specialists.
Despatches from the front from my mate who is still in the job and just got back from Poland meeting Ukr officers.
Morale is high but casualties are very high. Ukr Mil wants more western equipment faster but Ukr Mil also leaves quite a lot of stuff languishing unused in warehouses, train stations, etc due to technical and logistics issues. Javelin and Switchblade in particular. The army thinks the air force has gone AWOL. (Every land force in every conflict thinks this) No mood to compromise with Russia... yet... Ukr Mil will decide when not Zelenskyy.
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
I'd rather have the "Atlantic crap" thank you very much. 30°C+ conditions are fit for nothing except sitting somewhere shady with a fan constantly on and a cold drink. An inconvenience for a day, a miserable endurance trial if it goes on for weeks.
There’s a happy medium between Atlantic Crap and the Venusian temperatures of modern European summers. Sadly we seem to get it only rarely, though much of this working week fitted the bill. 24-27C with lots of sunshine.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
Nah, a Labour minority government having demolished a Conservative government would win a quick second election like Wilson did in 1966, whilst in a honeymoon period.
Not with inflation in double digits, and Wilson had a majority albeit tiny. A bit different to being 50 to 75 seats short of a majority and running an unstable minority
Yes, but able to blame the Tories for the economic crisis, and having gained 80 odd seats would win an election 6 months later.
We haven't had a government that lasted less than five years since 1974, and that was the exception of the postwar period. The British electorate doesn't want to change, then change back a few months later.
I am sure @ydoethur could let us know when the last time a LOTO formed a government, then lost power less than a couple of years later. Was it Ramsey Macdonald in the mid Twenties?
I don't think they would but the exact circumstances have never occured. Closest analogy is MacDonald minority that got crushed, Wilson 74 worked but he was larger party in february and BJ won from minority but as an almost majority in unique circs. Nobody in the last 100 years has lost to a larger party, formed a minority and gone on to win 6 months later/soon after If hes the larger party hes laughing
Yes, but nobody has lost from that scenario either.
Con 290 ish and uncoalitionable, Lab on 250 ish (which would mean significant Lab gains) is a unknown quantity, but my money would be on a further election within the year, where Labour gains more seats (like Wilson '66 and Oct '74) is more plausible than losing them back.
IMO if the Tories fall below 300, they are out for a decade. That is how long voters give a new government, as a minimum.
They've only ever given Labour a decade once and that was with Tories on 165 seats......... Its how long they give new tory givernments mimimum, except Heath who was a twat
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
I don't think this is impossible. But it must be less likely if the Tories get hammered in T and H. A result like Shropshire would not be great for election 2022 prospects, though Tory MPs/party would do well to despatch Boris quickly (don't hold your breath, having already missed the big chance, they really are that craven and useless.)
But something tells me that T and H is not home and dry for the LDs. It seems to me about 70/30. I just slightly wonder if Labour will accidentally split the vote enough, unlike Shropshire, to let the Tories hold on.
With you on this - can a Labour brexit voter ever vote for the Lib Dems? - unless of course they hate Boris so much.
I don't think the three Labour Brexit voters in T&H will make that much of a dent in the LD's total, tbh.
You should be right but it's the local election results ( I know I know) where the results just don't seem to reflect the Opinion Polls - last night for example the Tories had their best results for some time and its throwing my calculations
You need to drill down deeper there. Their percentages only increased in 2. Both of which were special in that previous independents/UKIp didn't stand, so the votes of all 3 main parties weren't really comparable.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
Nah, a Labour minority government having demolished a Conservative government would win a quick second election like Wilson did in 1966, whilst in a honeymoon period.
Not with inflation in double digits, and Wilson had a majority albeit tiny. A bit different to being 50 to 75 seats short of a majority and running an unstable minority
Yes, but able to blame the Tories for the economic crisis, and having gained 80 odd seats would win an election 6 months later.
We haven't had a government that lasted less than five years since 1974, and that was the exception of the postwar period. The British electorate doesn't want to change, then change back a few months later.
I am sure @ydoethur could let us know when the last time a LOTO formed a government, then lost power less than a couple of years later. Was it Ramsey Macdonald in the mid Twenties?
I don't think they would but the exact circumstances have never occured. Closest analogy is MacDonald minority that got crushed, Wilson 74 worked but he was larger party in february and BJ won from minority but as an almost majority in unique circs. Nobody in the last 100 years has lost to a larger party, formed a minority and gone on to win 6 months later/soon after If hes the larger party hes laughing
Yes, but nobody has lost from that scenario either.
Con 290 ish and uncoalitionable, Lab on 250 ish (which would mean significant Lab gains) is a unknown quantity, but my money would be on a further election within the year, where Labour gains more seats (like Wilson '66 and Oct '74) is more plausible than losing them back.
IMO if the Tories fall below 300, they are out for a decade. That is how long voters give a new government, as a minimum.
Sadly. There is some focus group evidence that "new government" is exactly what folk see this as being. There is "give them a chance. They haven't had any time at all, what with Covid" sentiment around.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That will probably be different courses. It sounds like this one is taking civilians and teaching them the basics.
Let's run some numbers. If we round three weeks to 20 days, then there are six cadres in the 120 days. 10,000 soldiers divided by 6 is about 1,600 people being trained at any one time.
According to (1), we had 17,000 people join the military in a year - though not all will be the army. If basic training is about 20 weeks, then we probably have the capability to train 1,600 extra - though we may have to cut our own intake, or
It certainly sniffs as though it is doable, but costly.
What language is going to be used to train these thousands of troops?
Ukrainian, at a guess. which means we will probably train the trainers (ones that know both Ukrainian and English, hopefully), who can then train their troops at our facilities, with our bods watching on.
It seems reasonable enough. If you want it to be done, it will be done.
And the language issue would be there wherever they train outside of Ukraine.
(As an aside, some/many will speak Russian as well. That might be interesting...)
In addition, various countries are already training lots of Ukrainians on relatively complex kit such as tanks and SAM systems. Not all the Ukrainians will know the host country's language, and I haven't heard it being reported as being an issue.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
On the other hand the new boundaries won't be ready until the second half of next year. I'm pretty sure the Tories don't want to have an election until they're in place.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
I don't think this is impossible. But it must be less likely if the Tories get hammered in T and H. A result like Shropshire would not be great for election 2022 prospects, though Tory MPs/party would do well to despatch Boris quickly (don't hold your breath, having already missed the big chance, they really are that craven and useless.)
But something tells me that T and H is not home and dry for the LDs. It seems to me about 70/30. I just slightly wonder if Labour will accidentally split the vote enough, unlike Shropshire, to let the Tories hold on.
With you on this - can a Labour brexit voter ever vote for the Lib Dems? - unless of course they hate Boris so much.
I don't think the three Labour Brexit voters in T&H will make that much of a dent in the LD's total, tbh.
You should be right but it's the local election results ( I know I know) where the results just don't seem to reflect the Opinion Polls - last night for example the Tories had their best results for some time and its throwing my calculations
You need to drill down deeper there. Their percentages only increased in 2. Both of which were special in that previous independents/UKIp didn't stand, so the votes of all 3 main parties weren't really comparable.
Thats not quite right. % gains in 3 and in Warwick they only lost 0.6%. In kidderminster they gained as much as Lab and LD combined But yes, differential party line ups etc They were 4 good results for the Tories generally but its 4 wards
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
If Labour is close enough to command a majority with confidence and supply from the SNP and the Liberal Democrats (i.e. without having to spend most of their time pacifying the little bits and pieces, and I'm thinking especially about Northern Irish complications here,) then I think they can make it work. The SNP can't bring down a Labour Government because of their long-held position of vehement opposition to Evil Tories, and the Lib Dems would obviously far prefer to work with Labour.
The two big issues that a Labour minority then has to get to grips with are:
1. How does it govern effectively if the SNP continues to observe a self-denying ordinance on legislation not applicable in Scotland, and this has the consequence of creating a Conservative majority in the Commons on such matters? 2. Would Labour have the confidence to believe that it can win an election under FPTP at any time in the near future - and if not, would it contemplate using electoral reform as an instrument to thwart another Tory majority a couple of years down the line?
The answer to the first question is that it can't, so the Parliament wouldn't last anything like a full term. The answer to the second question is the great unknowable. If Labour's MPs conclude that it's in their interest to adopt PR then that changes everything: they wouldn't need to operate a wobbly administration for five years, they could put the relevant legislation in their first Queen's Speech and have it on the statute book in a few months (or just over a year at the very maximum if the House of Lords vetoed it, which they most likely wouldn't,) and then go back to the country to sort the mess out. That, needless to say, would change just about everything.
In respect of PR, very unlikely they'd try and implement without a referendum and any change will require a few years (min 2 to 3) work with the electoral commission given that it requires redoing the boundaries completely. Their own MPs would be voting a chunk of themselves out of a job and if not a manifesto commitment a chunk would vote against and the SNP have nothing to gain from PR at the moment, it would lose them a lot of representation. The closer labour are to majority the easier but the less the need. If it looks like it might succeed i could see the Tories going for a compromise. Bulk FPTP with 100 top ups a la Holyrood/Sennedd as a spoiler to being permanently locked out
A Labour bloc of around 250 MPs wouldn't necessarily be voting for mass unemployment by going for a change of system; what they would probably be voting for is an opportunity to spend less time in opposition and more time in government.
I don't think that a referendum is necessarily a barrier to reform. The Conservative Party has sprayed excrement all over its brand, especially with regard to probity and respect for the rules - if they whine about change being introduced without a plebiscite (and, Lord alone knows, we've already had enough referendums to last a lifetime,) then they're on distinctly shaky ground.
Your point about the need to sort out the mechanics and draw up new boundaries is, however, well made. I should've thought of that myself. Labour probably would need to last somewhere close to a full term to get the job done, so that brings us back to whether or not the Parliamentary arithmetic in situations where they can't rely on the SNP for help will add up for them.
The Lords might be more of an obstacle if its not a manifesto committment and of course if Labour dont say they are committing in a manifesto, and cone into government in a crisis and the first thing they do is decide to implement a change to their long term electoral advantage that would be 'brave' politically If its not in their manifesto i think its not happening
At a minimum PR will be in the Lib Dem manifesto. Going for it could then be presented as the cost of buying their support. And regardless of whether or not you believe that the Lords would obstruct change, they've not the power to do so for more than a year in any case.
But anyway, I'm just playing through theoretical outcomes to distract myself from this bloody nasty heat until it finally eases off enough to go to bed. Most likely a Labour minority still clings to the current system like the clingiest cling film imaginable, and keeps its fingers crossed for better luck next time.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
Reading the MoD press release:
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
I also think that there is an urgent need to now start training the Ukrainians to use a wider range of NATO equipment.
That will probably be different courses. It sounds like this one is taking civilians and teaching them the basics.
Let's run some numbers. If we round three weeks to 20 days, then there are six cadres in the 120 days. 10,000 soldiers divided by 6 is about 1,600 people being trained at any one time.
According to (1), we had 17,000 people join the military in a year - though not all will be the army. If basic training is about 20 weeks, then we probably have the capability to train 1,600 extra - though we may have to cut our own intake, or
It certainly sniffs as though it is doable, but costly.
What language is going to be used to train these thousands of troops?
Ukrainian, at a guess. which means we will probably train the trainers (ones that know both Ukrainian and English, hopefully), who can then train their troops at our facilities, with our bods watching on.
It seems reasonable enough. If you want it to be done, it will be done.
And the language issue would be there wherever they train outside of Ukraine.
(As an aside, some/many will speak Russian as well. That might be interesting...)
Aren't the Russian and Ukrainian languages mutually intelligible?
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
On the other hand the new boundaries won't be ready until next year.
A very good point. That. And being some way behind in the polls. Sounds highly implausible to me. Has anyone ever called an election this early whilst behind?
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
I don't think this is impossible. But it must be less likely if the Tories get hammered in T and H. A result like Shropshire would not be great for election 2022 prospects, though Tory MPs/party would do well to despatch Boris quickly (don't hold your breath, having already missed the big chance, they really are that craven and useless.)
But something tells me that T and H is not home and dry for the LDs. It seems to me about 70/30. I just slightly wonder if Labour will accidentally split the vote enough, unlike Shropshire, to let the Tories hold on.
With you on this - can a Labour brexit voter ever vote for the Lib Dems? - unless of course they hate Boris so much.
I don't think the three Labour Brexit voters in T&H will make that much of a dent in the LD's total, tbh.
You should be right but it's the local election results ( I know I know) where the results just don't seem to reflect the Opinion Polls - last night for example the Tories had their best results for some time and its throwing my calculations
You need to drill down deeper there. Their percentages only increased in 2. Both of which were special in that previous independents/UKIp didn't stand, so the votes of all 3 main parties weren't really comparable.
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
I'd rather have the "Atlantic crap" thank you very much. 30°C+ conditions are fit for nothing except sitting somewhere shady with a fan constantly on and a cold drink. An inconvenience for a day, a miserable endurance trial if it goes on for weeks.
There’s a happy medium between Atlantic Crap and the Venusian temperatures of modern European summers. Sadly we seem to get it only rarely, though much of this working week fitted the bill. 24-27C with lots of sunshine.
Part of the art is to adapt your clothes (and timetable, and architecture) to the weather.
Seville is an incredibly civilised place to live, but it depends on fountains, siestas and shady streets.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
On the other hand the new boundaries won't be ready until next year.
A very good point. That. And being some way behind in the polls. Sounds highly implausible to me. Has anyone ever called an election this early whilst behind?
I don't think so. New boundaries makes tactical voting more difficult because in some seats it won't be clear who the main challenger to the Tories is. This didn't help the Tories in 1997 when there were new boundaries because they were heading for such a big defeat anyway.
Johnson was right to go to Ukraine. There's a war on.
And his going there (again) has helped how, exactly?
We all know he's only gone there because he's scared to campaign in the by-elections, and he needed a distraction from Geidt.
Very odd storty that Mr J has got Mr Williamson (of spider fame) to step down at next election so Mr J can have his safe seat rather than Uxbridge. NO idea if it is true.
...and it looks like Johnson may have forgotten to tell Gav of the sacrifice he is going to make.
Ah, sorry, apologies. I can't keep up with all the cringing and subservience preached by the Tories and their so-called honours. Will take care to call the gentleman SGW in future. Would not want to cause any offence.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
On the other hand the new boundaries won't be ready until next year.
A very good point. That. And being some way behind in the polls. Sounds highly implausible to me. Has anyone ever called an election this early whilst behind?
I don't think so. New boundaries makes tactical voting more difficult because in some seats it won't be clear who the main challenger to the Tories is. This didn't help the Tories in 1997 when there were new boundaries because they were heading for such a big defeat anyway.
Theyll lead to some cracking bullshit LD leaflets though. 'If we extrapolate the data from this one new street we see......' big old fucking orange bar
The problem with Johnson is he’s so toxic now that even if he really did care for the plight of the Ukrainians many just view all his actions now through the lense of cynicism .
When you’ve spent your whole life betraying people and thinking of nothing else but your own advancement why would that stop now .
Regardless of my political differences with previous Tory PMs I never viewed them in the same way .
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
I'd rather have the "Atlantic crap" thank you very much. 30°C+ conditions are fit for nothing except sitting somewhere shady with a fan constantly on and a cold drink. An inconvenience for a day, a miserable endurance trial if it goes on for weeks.
There’s a happy medium between Atlantic Crap and the Venusian temperatures of modern European summers. Sadly we seem to get it only rarely, though much of this working week fitted the bill. 24-27C with lots of sunshine.
The forecast for the next couple of weeks (once tomorrow is out of the way anyhow) suggests 20-22°C with a bit of sunshine and little prospect of rain. If that comes to pass it would be very pleasing. Upper 20's is quite tolerable provided that it cools down nicely at night (I can then get a decent sleep and go out and do all my running early morning.) What we've had today has been foul.
Twitter alexmassie@alexmassie·2h I don’t care if the prime minister’s trip to Ukraine today is cynical or opportunistic; on this issue he has said and, importantly, *done* many of the right things. It should be possible to recognise this while still thinking him a dreadful, unfit, PM.
The problem with Johnson is he’s so toxic now that even if he really did care for the plight of the Ukrainians many just view all his actions now through the lense of cynicism .
When you’ve spent your whole life betraying people and thinking of nothing else but your own advancement why would that stop now .
Regardless of my political differences with previous Tory PMs I never viewed them in the same way .
I wonder if Ukr's PM has noticed that everyone who gets involved with Johnson ends up being shat on?
I guess he figures take the military support now, while I can, who knows in the autumn.
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
I'd rather have the "Atlantic crap" thank you very much. 30°C+ conditions are fit for nothing except sitting somewhere shady with a fan constantly on and a cold drink. An inconvenience for a day, a miserable endurance trial if it goes on for weeks.
There’s a happy medium between Atlantic Crap and the Venusian temperatures of modern European summers. Sadly we seem to get it only rarely, though much of this working week fitted the bill. 24-27C with lots of sunshine.
The forecast for the next couple of weeks (once tomorrow is out of the way anyhow) suggests 20-22°C with a bit of sunshine and little prospect of rain. If that comes to pass it would be very pleasing. Upper 20's is quite tolerable provided that it cools down nicely at night (I can then get a decent sleep and go out and do all my running early morning.) What we've had today has been foul.
We had a cool morning, rain and no need to water the garden for a day or two, and a pleasantly sunny late afternoon. Some very happy tadpoles.
Controversial opinion....Eoin Morgan should be dropped from England ODI / T20 teams.
Drop Jason Roy first - although watching his colleagues get a world record score after he was out for a single, might do something for him. Morgan getting a duck let in Livingstone for his sensational innings.
I am usually not the biggest fan of England Cricket teams but even I think discussing which batsmen to drop after they have scored 498 in 50 overs is a bit of a discussion that need not be the most pressing to have!
Yes. PB is negative about the English cricket team to the point of being moronic about the English cricket team. It’s not a good place for tips when England are playing. The best plan is to ignore PB full stop during international cricket matches.
Twitter alexmassie@alexmassie·2h I don’t care if the prime minister’s trip to Ukraine today is cynical or opportunistic; on this issue he has said and, importantly, *done* many of the right things. It should be possible to recognise this while still thinking him a dreadful, unfit, PM.
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
I'd rather have the "Atlantic crap" thank you very much. 30°C+ conditions are fit for nothing except sitting somewhere shady with a fan constantly on and a cold drink. An inconvenience for a day, a miserable endurance trial if it goes on for weeks.
There’s a happy medium between Atlantic Crap and the Venusian temperatures of modern European summers. Sadly we seem to get it only rarely, though much of this working week fitted the bill. 24-27C with lots of sunshine.
Part of the art is to adapt your clothes (and timetable, and architecture) to the weather.
Seville is an incredibly civilised place to live, but it depends on fountains, siestas and shady streets.
And taking all of August off.
Very nice, I'm sure, but even if we set aside the practicalities of everyone having a whacking great holiday at the same time (and if this would mean we'd have naff all annual leave remaining to use for the remainder of the year,) demolishing and rebuilding the nation's entire housing stock does strike one as a trifle ambitious.
Practical measures are needed, and the best I can do is sit here in front of this stupid fan I've got on and wait and wait and wait for the roasting hot air to cool down a bit before I can go to bed (i.e. I've probably got to endure until past midnight.)
This is one of those occasions when I have particular reason to curse the astronomical property prices in this rotten country: anywhere sensible I could've afforded to trade up from a flat to a small house years ago, and then I'd have at least one of the rooms fitted with a decent aircon unit to deal properly with this problem.
"The Prime Minister has offered to launch a major training operation for Ukrainian forces, with the potential to train up to 10,000 soldiers every 120 days."
I like how the 10,000 number has obviously just been plucked out of thin air. I would also bet Johnson's book advance that it's news to the MoD too.
We've been providing training assistance for years prior to the invasion - and obviously at a greater pace since Putin's reckless gamble. For this to come out of the blue at this particular moment, and to require a PM visit to make an 'offer', does seem rather odd. Particularly as our two militaries are talking to each other on a daily basis.
🚨Don't tell Brenda from Bristol 👀Oct 27 snap gen election floated by @BorisJohnson allies
Why? 💥'Wedge week' - NIProtocol, Rwanda, rail row - seen as success ⚖️Avoids Privileges Cttee, Covid Inquiry, 1922 confidence vote
#WaughOnPolitics in yr inbox
inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-p…
It's on
The last week has been a success?
Can we check the aircon in the Westminster bunker?
The heat seems to be sending them mad.
(The best thing for the Conservative Party might be a quick, and quickly thrown, election. Dump the World Of Pain on the Otherlot Party, aim to bounce back in 2027.
But that means admitting how screwed they are if they wait, even until Advent 2024. And it limits Johnson's tenure. Which is why he won't want to go early. Because he might well lose.)
Best possible result for the Tories is 310 seats, let Labour run a clown college collective clusterfuck minority admin and destroy them in the inevitable election about 18 months later. And a very possible result on a very narrow tory lead if they can get there Thats if we are playing fuck the country, what about the party?
If the Conservatives get that close to a majority then they get put back into bat and Starmer resigns. There's absolutely nothing to stop Labour from acknowledging that they've lost the election, giving the Government six more months to be generally useless and screw up, and then pick its moment to call a vote of confidence and have a rematch with someone else in charge.
We don't get a Labour minority until the two large parties are at least somewhere close to parity and Labour can therefore get comfortably over the finishing line with the help of only one or two partners. They're not going to be stupid enough to leave themselves having to try to finesse everything with a constellation of six or seven parties.
True 310 is a bit nub close. 290 to 300 then. Labour would be on 250ish. They'd be terrified of another immediate election as where do you find the swing? Tories say 'we cannot form a stable government on these numbers as nobody will play with us' labour therefore have to govern or go into a second election immediately they will lose. Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader' And then theres party finances..... The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
Nah, a Labour minority government having demolished a Conservative government would win a quick second election like Wilson did in 1966, whilst in a honeymoon period.
Not with inflation in double digits, and Wilson had a majority albeit tiny. A bit different to being 50 to 75 seats short of a majority and running an unstable minority
Yes, but able to blame the Tories for the economic crisis, and having gained 80 odd seats would win an election 6 months later.
We haven't had a government that lasted less than five years since 1974, and that was the exception of the postwar period. The British electorate doesn't want to change, then change back a few months later.
I am sure @ydoethur could let us know when the last time a LOTO formed a government, then lost power less than a couple of years later. Was it Ramsey Macdonald in the mid Twenties?
Taking 'a couple of years later' as 'two years or less,' yes it was McDonald who was PM for ten months in 1924.
Before that it was Gladstone in 1885, and Salisbury also in 1885. Before that it was Derby (three times from 1852 to 1866) and before that Peel in 1834.
Those are the only ones since the Great Reform Act.
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
I'd rather have the "Atlantic crap" thank you very much. 30°C+ conditions are fit for nothing except sitting somewhere shady with a fan constantly on and a cold drink. An inconvenience for a day, a miserable endurance trial if it goes on for weeks.
There’s a happy medium between Atlantic Crap and the Venusian temperatures of modern European summers. Sadly we seem to get it only rarely, though much of this working week fitted the bill. 24-27C with lots of sunshine.
Part of the art is to adapt your clothes (and timetable, and architecture) to the weather.
Seville is an incredibly civilised place to live, but it depends on fountains, siestas and shady streets.
Why should it be newsworthy that a day in mid-June is the hottest of the year so far? Summer is here. That's what is meant to happen.
If it was the case in November, that would be a story.
Hot sunny days near mid-summer? Who would have predicted that 😎
You are confusing daylight hours with heating.
June is not traditionally a hot month despite having long hours of sunshine. Insolation means late July and early August are hotter. Hence why all the records are made in that period.
Nothing exceptional about today’s temperatures in Britain. 32.7C at Sandton Downham was hot for the time of year - we rarely get 32C+ before the solstice, but it’s certainly not freakish.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
I'd rather have the "Atlantic crap" thank you very much. 30°C+ conditions are fit for nothing except sitting somewhere shady with a fan constantly on and a cold drink. An inconvenience for a day, a miserable endurance trial if it goes on for weeks.
There’s a happy medium between Atlantic Crap and the Venusian temperatures of modern European summers. Sadly we seem to get it only rarely, though much of this working week fitted the bill. 24-27C with lots of sunshine.
Part of the art is to adapt your clothes (and timetable, and architecture) to the weather.
Seville is an incredibly civilised place to live, but it depends on fountains, siestas and shady streets.
And taking all of August off.
Very nice, I'm sure, but even if we set aside the practicalities of everyone having a whacking great holiday at the same time (and if this would mean we'd have naff all annual leave remaining to use for the remainder of the year,) demolishing and rebuilding the nation's entire housing stock does strike one as a trifle ambitious.
Practical measures are needed, and the best I can do is sit here in front of this stupid fan I've got on and wait and wait and wait for the roasting hot air to cool down a bit before I can go to bed (i.e. I've probably got to endure until past midnight.)
This is one of those occasions when I have particular reason to curse the astronomical property prices in this rotten country: anywhere sensible I could've afforded to trade up from a flat to a small house years ago, and then I'd have at least one of the rooms fitted with a decent aircon unit to deal properly with this problem.
Most houses in the UK don't have aircon. If you're using a fairly crappy 'fly killer' sort of rotary fan, and can afford a little upgrade, a beefier fan unit/humidifier might be a worthwhile investment.
Round 2 of the French legislative voting on Sunday.
Seeing a few polls suggesting NUPES may win enough seats to deprive Ensemble of an overall majority but that's not a huge concern for Macron as the UDC bloc will win enough seats to allow Ensemble to govern without too many issues.
Roughly 285 for Ensemble and 210 for NUPES with maybe 60 for UDC would seem a reasonable prediction.
Why should it be newsworthy that a day in mid-June is the hottest of the year so far? Summer is here. That's what is meant to happen.
If it was the case in November, that would be a story.
Hot sunny days near mid-summer? Who would have predicted that 😎
You are confusing daylight hours with heating.
June is not traditionally a hot month despite having long hours of sunshine. Insolation means late July and early August are hotter. Hence why all the records are made in that period.
The equivalent would be having a really cold snap in mid-December. It's late January and February when you expect that. Not that we get proper cold much any more anyway.
Comments
or anyone close to him: why not say, or anyone at all?
Has sir Gav fallen for a hoax call?
Starmer has to get most seats and close to 300 to make a labour administration work out or it will be a very short 'what were we thinking? Oh look, the Tories have a new leader'
And then theres party finances.....
The Tories ars only scared of a drubbing, if they hold high 200s and above they are laughing
I know top bods in all organisations go on jollies, but there are definitely times when face-to-face meetings are needed. And I'm far from convinced that Ukraine is the first place someone would choose to go at the moment if they wanted a safer space...
She was shunted pretty sharpish from every appointment, no? Moved to ever more ceremonial roles until she was back on the backbenches.
I guess it might neuter the result of that committee if Johnson wins a decent majority again. What ever they come up with the 1922 wont get the letters by that point?
So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane .
2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation.
3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that.
in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane.
Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks.
https://twitter.com/BWallaceMP/status/1537864043939172353
But something tells me that T and H is not home and dry for the LDs. It seems to me about 70/30. I just slightly wonder if Labour will accidentally split the vote enough, unlike Shropshire, to let the Tories hold on.
Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP
United Kingdom government official
So there is a lot of rubbish being spouted about the PM’s trip to Ukriane. 1. Firstly these trips are organised in total secrecy. Very few, and i mean very few, people know the dates and arrangements. Russia is still launching missile strikes right across Ukriane . 1/5
Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP·5m
United Kingdom government official
Replying to
@BWallaceMP
2. Visits are sometimes necessary in person because not everything can be discussed securely over phones etc. Russia has an aggressive electronic warfare and signal intelligence operation. 2/5
Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP·6m
United Kingdom government official
3. The timings of such visits are usually a matter for the hosts but I know the PM wanted to visit before Nato Leaders summit in 10 days time. 4. As a Northern MP , myself i am not affronted by the fact he had to cancel speaking at the conference. The PM can remedy that 3/5
Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP·7m
United Kingdom government official
in many ways however taking the opportunity to visit a country and ally at war to ensure we are doing everything we can to help is also important. As a northern MP I am proud that Britain has been at the forefront of the international effort to support Ukriane. 4/5
Rt. Hon Ben Wallace MP@BWallaceMP·7m
United Kingdom government official
Helping Ukriane win and trying to help at home are linked. Part of the inflation we see comes from gas and food prices which are partly driven upwards because of this conflict. Amazing how an important trip can generate so much conspiracy bollocks. 5/5
One of the reasons that Downing was confident during the Battle of Britain, was that the Canadian pipeline was accelerating. And providing properly trained pilots. Not the 10 hour victims of WWI.
The two big issues that a Labour minority then has to get to grips with are:
1. How does it govern effectively if the SNP continues to observe a self-denying ordinance on legislation not applicable in Scotland, and this has the consequence of creating a Conservative majority in the Commons on such matters?
2. Would Labour have the confidence to believe that it can win an election under FPTP at any time in the near future - and if not, would it contemplate using electoral reform as an instrument to thwart another Tory majority a couple of years down the line?
The answer to the first question is that it can't, so the Parliament wouldn't last anything like a full term. The answer to the second question is the great unknowable. If Labour's MPs conclude that it's in their interest to adopt PR then that changes everything: they wouldn't need to operate a wobbly administration for five years, they could put the relevant legislation in their first Queen's Speech and have it on the statute book in a few months (or just over a year at the very maximum if the House of Lords vetoed it, which they most likely wouldn't,) and then go back to the country to sort the mess out. That, needless to say, would change just about everything.
Wallace may be an idiot, but he's right that people are making asses out of themselves over this.
"Each soldier would spend three weeks on the training course, learning battle winning skills for the front line, as well as basic medical training, cyber-security and counter explosive tactics."
Though I note that the Ukranian Army has won more battles than our army over the last couple of decades. Indeed when was our army's last major victory?
We haven't had a government that lasted less than five years since 1974, and that was the exception of the postwar period. The British electorate doesn't want to change, then change back a few months later.
I am sure @ydoethur could let us know when the last time a LOTO formed a government, then lost power less than a couple of years later. Was it Ramsey Macdonald in the mid Twenties?
2. I find it funny how people who profess no admiration for Johnson's judgement in Ministerial appointments (quite the opposite), suddently flip to highlighting
lack of advancement in his cabinet as a valid criticism of someone's abilities. It's Dura Ace's main criticism of Mordaunt that she's not a shining star in the firmament of Boris's inner circle. Now it's apparently a criticism of Leadsom that she's not the current Jacob Rees Mogg.
Give them a safe place to learn how not to shoot their own feet off.
It probably won't be teaching them the more specialist stuff.
Simon Clarke said that big increases in salaries to meet the rising cost of living could end up in a 1970s style "inflationary spiral".
This happens when wage rises help push up the cost of living.
But unions said that energy prices, not wages, were driving up the cost of living.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61846102
Mr Clarke can be added to the list of well-remunerated suits, including the Prime Minister and the Governor of the Bank of England, who can be told to get knotted. Struggling businesses may need to ask their employees to burden share, but profitable ones and the public sector should both be paying decent wage settlements. The former can pay for it by paying out lower dividends; the latter can do so if the Government taxes the well-off properly.
The more exceptional context is across Western Europe. Earliest ever 40C in France yesterday, another 40+ today, coming after the hottest May on record there and widespread exceptional drought, June records falling in Spain, pre-monsoon records in India etc.
Almost every year these days a summer heat dome forms over Western and Central Europe giving locations that used to get a few days in the 30s every summer regular 35C+ heatwaves. We continue to get all the Atlantic crap but occasionally benefit from the odd waft of the hot stuff. The frequency of 34 and 35C days in England in the last couple of decades has jumped far faster than the average summer temperature has (as foretold by simple maths when there is a shift in a normal distribution).
Twitter
alexmassie@alexmassie·2h
I don’t care if the prime minister’s trip to Ukraine today is cynical or opportunistic; on this issue he has said and, importantly, *done* many of the right things. It should be possible to recognise this while still thinking him a dreadful, unfit, PM.
https://twitter.com/alexmassie
Let's run some numbers. If we round three weeks to 20 days, then there are six cadres in the 120 days. 10,000 soldiers divided by 6 is about 1,600 people being trained at any one time.
According to (1), we had 17,000 people join the military in a year - though not all will be the army. If basic training is about 20 weeks, then we probably have the capability to train 1,600 extra - though we may have to cut our own intake, or
It certainly sniffs as though it is doable, but costly.
(1): https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/quarterly-service-personnel-statistics-2021/quarterly-service-personnel-statistics-1-october-2021
If it looks like it might succeed i could see the Tories going for a compromise. Bulk FPTP with 100 top ups a la Holyrood/Sennedd as a spoiler to being permanently locked out
I can't think straight on days like this one.
Thetford Warren Lodge is nearby: a tower built to protect gamekeepers from poachers wanting rabbits!
https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/thetford-warren-lodge/
Nobody in the last 100 years has lost to a larger party, formed a minority and gone on to win 6 months later/soon after
If hes the larger party hes laughing
A Labour bloc of around 250 MPs wouldn't necessarily be voting for mass unemployment by going for a change of system; what they would probably be voting for is an opportunity to spend less time in opposition and more time in government.
I don't think that a referendum is necessarily a barrier to reform. The Conservative Party has sprayed excrement all over its brand, especially with regard to probity and respect for the rules - if they whine about change being introduced without a plebiscite (and, Lord alone knows, we've already had enough referendums to last a lifetime,) then they're on distinctly shaky ground.
Your point about the need to sort out the mechanics and draw up new boundaries is, however, well made. I should've thought of that myself. Labour probably would need to last somewhere close to a full term to get the job done, so that brings us back to whether or not the Parliamentary arithmetic in situations where they can't rely on the SNP for help will add up for them.
.
It seems reasonable enough. If you want it to be done, it will be done.
And the language issue would be there wherever they train outside of Ukraine.
(As an aside, some/many will speak Russian as well. That might be interesting...)
Con 290 ish and uncoalitionable, Lab on 250 ish (which would mean significant Lab gains) is a unknown quantity, but my money would be on a further election within the year, where Labour gains more seats (like Wilson '66 and Oct '74) is more plausible than losing them back.
IMO if the Tories fall below 300, they are out for a decade. That is how long voters give a new government, as a minimum.
If its not in their manifesto i think its not happening
Morale is high but casualties are very high.
Ukr Mil wants more western equipment faster but Ukr Mil also leaves quite a lot of stuff languishing unused in warehouses, train stations, etc due to technical and logistics issues. Javelin and Switchblade in particular.
The army thinks the air force has gone AWOL. (Every land force in every conflict thinks this)
No mood to compromise with Russia... yet...
Ukr Mil will decide when not Zelenskyy.
Its how long they give new tory givernments mimimum, except Heath who was a twat
There is "give them a chance. They haven't had any time at all, what with Covid" sentiment around.
In kidderminster they gained as much as Lab and LD combined
But yes, differential party line ups etc
They were 4 good results for the Tories generally but its 4 wards
But anyway, I'm just playing through theoretical outcomes to distract myself from this bloody nasty heat until it finally eases off enough to go to bed. Most likely a Labour minority still clings to the current system like the clingiest cling film imaginable, and keeps its fingers crossed for better luck next time.
That. And being some way behind in the polls.
Sounds highly implausible to me.
Has anyone ever called an election this early whilst behind?
Seville is an incredibly civilised place to live, but it depends on fountains, siestas and shady streets.
And taking all of August off.
'If we extrapolate the data from this one new street we see......' big old fucking orange bar
When you’ve spent your whole life betraying people and thinking of nothing else but your own advancement why would that stop now .
Regardless of my political differences with previous Tory PMs I never viewed them in the same way .
I guess he figures take the military support now, while I can, who knows in the autumn.
Practical measures are needed, and the best I can do is sit here in front of this stupid fan I've got on and wait and wait and wait for the roasting hot air to cool down a bit before I can go to bed (i.e. I've probably got to endure until past midnight.)
This is one of those occasions when I have particular reason to curse the astronomical property prices in this rotten country: anywhere sensible I could've afforded to trade up from a flat to a small house years ago, and then I'd have at least one of the rooms fitted with a decent aircon unit to deal properly with this problem.
For this to come out of the blue at this particular moment, and to require a PM visit to make an 'offer', does seem rather odd.
Particularly as our two militaries are talking to each other on a daily basis.
Before that it was Gladstone in 1885, and Salisbury also in 1885. Before that it was Derby (three times from 1852 to 1866) and before that Peel in 1834.
Those are the only ones since the Great Reform Act.
@darkage - thanks, received and appreciated.
June is not traditionally a hot month despite having long hours of sunshine. Insolation means late July and early August are hotter. Hence why all the records are made in that period.
Seeing a few polls suggesting NUPES may win enough seats to deprive Ensemble of an overall majority but that's not a huge concern for Macron as the UDC bloc will win enough seats to allow Ensemble to govern without too many issues.
Roughly 285 for Ensemble and 210 for NUPES with maybe 60 for UDC would seem a reasonable prediction.
Not that we get proper cold much any more anyway.