Government of National Unity under PM Ed Davey to see us through to the next GE?
If I had a pound for every time someone mentioned a “ Government of National Unity” on here since 2016 I’d have enough for two pints at my local. Possibly three depending upon what I’m buying.
I think that the problem we must face is that there may not be an end to the war in Ukraine. If Russia can hold a line using mobilised troops, then surely it will, and we know it can take unlimited human losses, because Russians will not rise up against their government. It could just go on for years like this. How many billions can the US pump in to it and how much economic harm can Europe take? Is it indefinete?
The problem that people must see is that there is a very high risk of a sudden political capitulation in Europe and the US over this winter, resulting in withdrawal of political support for the funding of the war in Ukraine at the current levels. This is probably what the 'master strategist' Putin is expecting to happen. There are murmurs of it all over the place, particularly in the US.
There is no way of shutting this type of thinking down in a democracy. The Ukrainian propoganda machine has done a brilliant job to date but it cannot go on like this indefinetly. How deep and resolute is western support for Ukraine? Could the people currently waving Ukrainian flags on Council estates be swayed by the narrative that we are being bankrupted by a woke LGBTQI+ conspiracy? What about all the refugees that we have taken in and expect to be housed indefinetly, whilst a large part of Ukraine is not affected by the fighting?
The position of the French, or trying to find a solution along the lines suggested by Elon Musk, is not totally stupid. If you are going to keep supporting the war, you need to work out what your endgame is and how likely that it will be achieved, and at what cost. I would say that there are two problems, one being that it is unlikely that the war can ultimately actually be won on any conventional level; and secondly that given the political dynamics of Russia, any replacement for Putin and his regime is unlikely to be favourable to our long term interests.
A lot of things are possible, but they are not certain.
Yes, Russia might be able to stabilise the front with conscripts, and Western resolve to support the war might crumble. But, the Ukrainians might be able to continue to make advances and the public might be more determined then you give them credit for.
So, at the moment, I think it is best to provide as much support as possible, encourage others to do the same, and we can see where we are in several months time.
Why give up on the chance of a victory for Ukraine because of your fear that it won't happen? Give them a chance.
The current performance of the mobiks seems very poor, and their equipment completely lacking. They are in for an awful time as the autumn mud then winter frosts take over. It could lead to major collapses of the Russian line.
At some point in all of this, he’s going to seriously piss off someone with the power to damage his business interests.
I suspect his erratic behaviour is a sign that his business interests are already being damaged.
Indeed. Well he’s having to pay close to double what Twitter should have been, having launched the takeover on a whim, right at the top of a peak in tech shares earlier in the year.
Tesla shares, where most of his funding for the Twitter buyout is coming, are also down nearly 50% in the past few months, as markets start to treat them as more of a manufacturing company and less of a tech stock, and they now face more serious competition from established carmakers.
I think that the problem we must face is that there may not be an end to the war in Ukraine. If Russia can hold a line using mobilised troops, then surely it will, and we know it can take unlimited human losses, because Russians will not rise up against their government. It could just go on for years like this. How many billions can the US pump in to it and how much economic harm can Europe take? Is it indefinete?
The problem that people must see is that there is a very high risk of a sudden political capitulation in Europe and the US over this winter, resulting in withdrawal of political support for the funding of the war in Ukraine at the current levels. This is probably what the 'master strategist' Putin is expecting to happen. There are murmurs of it all over the place, particularly in the US.
There is no way of shutting this type of thinking down in a democracy. The Ukrainian propoganda machine has done a brilliant job to date but it cannot go on like this indefinetly. How deep and resolute is western support for Ukraine? Could the people currently waving Ukrainian flags on Council estates be swayed by the narrative that we are being bankrupted by a woke LGBTQI+ conspiracy? What about all the refugees that we have taken in and expect to be housed indefinetly, whilst a large part of Ukraine is not affected by the fighting?
The position of the French, or trying to find a solution along the lines suggested by Elon Musk, is not totally stupid. If you are going to keep supporting the war, you need to work out what your endgame is and how likely that it will be achieved, and at what cost. I would say that there are two problems, one being that it is unlikely that the war can ultimately actually be won on any conventional level; and secondly that given the political dynamics of Russia, any replacement for Putin and his regime is unlikely to be favourable to our long term interests.
A lot of things are possible, but they are not certain.
Yes, Russia might be able to stabilise the front with conscripts, and Western resolve to support the war might crumble. But, the Ukrainians might be able to continue to make advances and the public might be more determined then you give them credit for.
So, at the moment, I think it is best to provide as much support as possible, encourage others to do the same, and we can see where we are in several months time.
Why give up on the chance of a victory for Ukraine because of your fear that it won't happen? Give them a chance.
I'm not 'giving up' on Ukraine in any way. But it is not too difficult to see that the war that is being funded by the US and its allies through deliveries of advanced weapons and it has actually been like this from the beginning of the conflict. So the 'david and goliath' narrative is not quite correct. If the delivery of weapons stopped, then Russia would 'win', albeit probably only in a phyrric sense as they wouldn't control the country and there would then be a brutal civil war that would be disasterous for everyone. So I don't think the deliveries of weapons should stop, but think that some kind of pragmatic resolution to the conflict is desirable, particularly whilst Russia is at the point (as it currently is) of some weakness.
I've supported Ukraine from the beginning, including by donating large amounts of my own money to the cause, but I can see there are now great dangers in the 'beat back Putin' narrative which is emerging and is espoused by western governments.
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
Ipsos Mori comes with a goody bag of things to pour over, making it one of the best monthly polls in my opinion. I’m hopeful of a social economic chart to see which groupings have been on the move this month.
The headline voting figures not such a good poll for Labour this one though as Previous polls from this firm tend to be a tad Labour friendly.
At some point in all of this, he’s going to seriously piss off someone with the power to damage his business interests.
No wonder Congress keep telling NASA to purse alternate launch systems. They can't have that fucking chubby maniac having a monopoly.
Monopolies are almost universally a bad thing.
Someone else needs to step up and make a rocket, because SLS is showing the world how not to do it, and how not to do it whilst spending billions not doing it.
I think that, under the powers of the War Production Act, the US government can intervene to ensure Starlink continues to operate for Ukraine. So government's give themselves powers in war to prevent one person having so much power (or, at least, making the one person with that power the elected head of government).
One reason I tend to think Truss is staying is that the Parliamentary Conservative Party would have to coalesce around one person for leader. They can’t throw this back to the membership. I don’t see much sign of them coalescing around anything. You may as well try herding cats.
I think that the problem we must face is that there may not be an end to the war in Ukraine. If Russia can hold a line using mobilised troops, then surely it will, and we know it can take unlimited human losses, because Russians will not rise up against their government. It could just go on for years like this. How many billions can the US pump in to it and how much economic harm can Europe take? Is it indefinete?
The problem that people must see is that there is a very high risk of a sudden political capitulation in Europe and the US over this winter, resulting in withdrawal of political support for the funding of the war in Ukraine at the current levels. This is probably what the 'master strategist' Putin is expecting to happen. There are murmurs of it all over the place, particularly in the US.
There is no way of shutting this type of thinking down in a democracy. The Ukrainian propoganda machine has done a brilliant job to date but it cannot go on like this indefinetly. How deep and resolute is western support for Ukraine? Could the people currently waving Ukrainian flags on Council estates be swayed by the narrative that we are being bankrupted by a woke LGBTQI+ conspiracy? What about all the refugees that we have taken in and expect to be housed indefinetly, whilst a large part of Ukraine is not affected by the fighting?
The position of the French, or trying to find a solution along the lines suggested by Elon Musk, is not totally stupid. If you are going to keep supporting the war, you need to work out what your endgame is and how likely that it will be achieved, and at what cost. I would say that there are two problems, one being that it is unlikely that the war can ultimately actually be won on any conventional level; and secondly that given the political dynamics of Russia, any replacement for Putin and his regime is unlikely to be favourable to our long term interests.
A lot of things are possible, but they are not certain.
Yes, Russia might be able to stabilise the front with conscripts, and Western resolve to support the war might crumble. But, the Ukrainians might be able to continue to make advances and the public might be more determined then you give them credit for.
So, at the moment, I think it is best to provide as much support as possible, encourage others to do the same, and we can see where we are in several months time.
Why give up on the chance of a victory for Ukraine because of your fear that it won't happen? Give them a chance.
The current performance of the mobiks seems very poor, and their equipment completely lacking. They are in for an awful time as the autumn mud then winter frosts take over. It could lead to major collapses of the Russian line.
In the south of Ukraine, the weather doesn't exactly go to hell -
In addition, since the Germans came by for a holiday, there are many, many more metalled roads, better gravel minor roads and the drainage for farming has massively reduced the mud factor in a number of places.
When you add in the fact that modern vehicles have vastly higher power to weight ratios, and the good ones have much better "flotation".... General Mud may not be victorious after all.
56% for Rejoin, excluding DK/abstain, so not far out of line with previous polling.
Rejoin is clearly not a minority position, though won't be on the cards in England next GE for a major party. (I am not sure of the Green position).
I would expect in the election after next, a case to be made, probably by the Lib Dems at least (maybe labour) for rejoining the Single market/EEA etc.
Elon - why? I know you need money but this really isn’t a good look
He’s making a right idiot of himself here, and I say that as someone who quite likes what he’s doing with SpaceX.
Sadly, appeasement towards Russia is now quite mainstream thinking in the US, across the whole political spectrum. There’s an awful lot of people suggesting that Ukraine should sue for peace, or that it’s no longer in the US interest to keep supporting Ukraine now Putin is threatening nuclear escalation.
This is, of course, exactly what Putin wants. Thankfully, most Western leaders remain behind arming Ukraine.
Thankfully another quiet night there last night, with only a handful of missiles launched, more than half of which were shot down. Steady advances by the defenders in Kherson region too, they’re now only about 5km from the airport in the West of the city, and have retaken more than half the occupied lands in the North of the region, in the past couple of weeks.
It does sound a bit 1917 out there. This story is going around:
That doesn’t sound good, if there’s any truth to it. Also reports that Russian civilians in Kherson are being told to leave - how exactly they’re supposed to leave, is a different question. The bridges are all full of holes, and even the supply barge across the river was sunk last week.
Is there any objective appraisal out there of how the Ukrainians have been treating Russians (military and civilian) in the areas they have recaptured? I have seen a few comments about atrocities but nothing on the scale of Russian crimes. Is this because the Ukrainians are more disciplined or because they are better at controlling the news?
There's the video of the Russian with the broken back on top of a wrecked BTR getting punched in the face by UAF. There's probably plenty going on on both sides. No saints on the battlefied no matter who the combatants are.
True - but there is certainly a difference.
Ukraine has military discipline where Russia doesn't; only one of the two sides has invited and given access to UN observers on an ongoing basis; and I don't think there's a great deal of independent journalism going on in occupied territories. And if Ukraine is running torture chambers, then they've managed to keep it very quiet indeed.
Elon - why? I know you need money but this really isn’t a good look
He’s making a right idiot of himself here, and I say that as someone who quite likes what he’s doing with SpaceX.
Sadly, appeasement towards Russia is now quite mainstream thinking in the US, across the whole political spectrum. There’s an awful lot of people suggesting that Ukraine should sue for peace, or that it’s no longer in the US interest to keep supporting Ukraine now Putin is threatening nuclear escalation.
This is, of course, exactly what Putin wants. Thankfully, most Western leaders remain behind arming Ukraine.
Thankfully another quiet night there last night, with only a handful of missiles launched, more than half of which were shot down. Steady advances by the defenders in Kherson region too, they’re now only about 5km from the airport in the West of the city, and have retaken more than half the occupied lands in the North of the region, in the past couple of weeks.
It does sound a bit 1917 out there. This story is going around:
That doesn’t sound good, if there’s any truth to it. Also reports that Russian civilians in Kherson are being told to leave - how exactly they’re supposed to leave, is a different question. The bridges are all full of holes, and even the supply barge across the river was sunk last week.
Is there any objective appraisal out there of how the Ukrainians have been treating Russians (military and civilian) in the areas they have recaptured? I have seen a few comments about atrocities but nothing on the scale of Russian crimes. Is this because the Ukrainians are more disciplined or because they are better at controlling the news?
There's the video of the Russian with the broken back on top of a wrecked BTR getting punched in the face by UAF. There's probably plenty going on on both sides. No saints on the battlefied no matter who the combatants are.
Yep agreed. I think I would be more concerned about eth Ukrainians if there were none of these reports/leaks. To me it would indicate they had a very tight hold on information which might be hiding all manner of abuses. It is unrealistic to think it doesn't happen. The question is whether it is a matter of military policy as it appears to be by the Russians.
The word coming from journos I know working in Ukraine (very trustworthy sources) is that the Ukraine authorities have a very tight grip on reporting. Understandable, given that they've been invaded and are very dependent on messaging, but the journos say it is very difficult to investigate and report without interference.
I think that, under the powers of the War Production Act, the US government can intervene to ensure Starlink continues to operate for Ukraine. So government's give themselves powers in war to prevent one person having so much power (or, at least, making the one person with that power the elected head of government).
Did not know that!
Asking someone to do something without being paid doesn't come under the Act - there was a specific case on this in WWII.
What is not allowed is refusal to do something after being asked by the government and offer a fair price.
Nearly every country I can think of has some version of such powers - government takes stuff over in time of national emergency.
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think that the problem we must face is that there may not be an end to the war in Ukraine. If Russia can hold a line using mobilised troops, then surely it will, and we know it can take unlimited human losses, because Russians will not rise up against their government. It could just go on for years like this. How many billions can the US pump in to it and how much economic harm can Europe take? Is it indefinete?
The problem that people must see is that there is a very high risk of a sudden political capitulation in Europe and the US over this winter, resulting in withdrawal of political support for the funding of the war in Ukraine at the current levels. This is probably what the 'master strategist' Putin is expecting to happen. There are murmurs of it all over the place, particularly in the US.
There is no way of shutting this type of thinking down in a democracy. The Ukrainian propoganda machine has done a brilliant job to date but it cannot go on like this indefinetly. How deep and resolute is western support for Ukraine? Could the people currently waving Ukrainian flags on Council estates be swayed by the narrative that we are being bankrupted by a woke LGBTQI+ conspiracy? What about all the refugees that we have taken in and expect to be housed indefinetly, whilst a large part of Ukraine is not affected by the fighting?
The position of the French, or trying to find a solution along the lines suggested by Elon Musk, is not totally stupid. If you are going to keep supporting the war, you need to work out what your endgame is and how likely that it will be achieved, and at what cost. I would say that there are two problems, one being that it is unlikely that the war can ultimately actually be won on any conventional level; and secondly that given the political dynamics of Russia, any replacement for Putin and his regime is unlikely to be favourable to our long term interests.
A lot of things are possible, but they are not certain.
Yes, Russia might be able to stabilise the front with conscripts, and Western resolve to support the war might crumble. But, the Ukrainians might be able to continue to make advances and the public might be more determined then you give them credit for.
So, at the moment, I think it is best to provide as much support as possible, encourage others to do the same, and we can see where we are in several months time.
Why give up on the chance of a victory for Ukraine because of your fear that it won't happen? Give them a chance.
The current performance of the mobiks seems very poor, and their equipment completely lacking. They are in for an awful time as the autumn mud then winter frosts take over. It could lead to major collapses of the Russian line.
In the south of Ukraine, the weather doesn't exactly go to hell -
In addition, since the Germans came by for a holiday, there are many, many more metalled roads, better gravel minor roads and the drainage for farming has massively reduced the mud factor in a number of places.
When you add in the fact that modern vehicles have vastly higher power to weight ratios, and the good ones have much better "flotation".... General Mud may not be victorious after all.
The further south you go in Ukraine, unsurprisingly, the better the weather gets. Still muddy from Dec to Feb though.
In the North of the country, it will be muddy now but freeze next month, with the big thaw at the beginning of March, as we saw last year.
My report outside the British embassy here in Washington DC just after the Chancellor hurriedly left for the airport rushed back from the IMF talks a day early… because he was “v v keen to talk to MPs” and ministers about the Debt plan, we were told https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1580844128459685889/video/1
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think the Tories would steal the policies. They’ve no saleable ideas of their own.
“Yesterday, I announced we were betting the economy on ‘Emperor Spirit’ at the 2.50 race at Haydock. Today I have asked the Chancellor to return early from the US to join me at the course this afternoon as we watch the delivery of our fresh plan for growth.’ https://twitter.com/Aiannucci/status/1580819188947750912/photo/1
Finally a plan! The concern however is that it's untested in current conditions.
Who was it who says 'no plan survives first contact with the enemy?'
Reality being Truss' worst enemy ...
von Moltke
I prefer the modern iteration "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the dace."
What if their plan is to get punched in the dace [sic]?
Thats when you surprise them with the enormo-haddock.
I think that the problem we must face is that there may not be an end to the war in Ukraine. If Russia can hold a line using mobilised troops, then surely it will, and we know it can take unlimited human losses, because Russians will not rise up against their government. It could just go on for years like this. How many billions can the US pump in to it and how much economic harm can Europe take? Is it indefinete?
The problem that people must see is that there is a very high risk of a sudden political capitulation in Europe and the US over this winter, resulting in withdrawal of political support for the funding of the war in Ukraine at the current levels. This is probably what the 'master strategist' Putin is expecting to happen. There are murmurs of it all over the place, particularly in the US.
There is no way of shutting this type of thinking down in a democracy. The Ukrainian propoganda machine has done a brilliant job to date but it cannot go on like this indefinetly. How deep and resolute is western support for Ukraine? Could the people currently waving Ukrainian flags on Council estates be swayed by the narrative that we are being bankrupted by a woke LGBTQI+ conspiracy? What about all the refugees that we have taken in and expect to be housed indefinetly, whilst a large part of Ukraine is not affected by the fighting?
The position of the French, or trying to find a solution along the lines suggested by Elon Musk, is not totally stupid. If you are going to keep supporting the war, you need to work out what your endgame is and how likely that it will be achieved, and at what cost. I would say that there are two problems, one being that it is unlikely that the war can ultimately actually be won on any conventional level; and secondly that given the political dynamics of Russia, any replacement for Putin and his regime is unlikely to be favourable to our long term interests.
A lot of things are possible, but they are not certain.
Yes, Russia might be able to stabilise the front with conscripts, and Western resolve to support the war might crumble. But, the Ukrainians might be able to continue to make advances and the public might be more determined then you give them credit for.
So, at the moment, I think it is best to provide as much support as possible, encourage others to do the same, and we can see where we are in several months time.
Why give up on the chance of a victory for Ukraine because of your fear that it won't happen? Give them a chance.
I'm not 'giving up' on Ukraine in any way. But it is not too difficult to see that the war that is being funded by the US and its allies through deliveries of advanced weapons and it has actually been like this from the beginning of the conflict. So the 'david and goliath' narrative is not quite correct. If the delivery of weapons stopped, then Russia would 'win', albeit probably only in a phyrric sense as they wouldn't control the country and there would then be a brutal civil war that would be disasterous for everyone. So I don't think the deliveries of weapons should stop, but think that some kind of pragmatic resolution to the conflict is desirable, particularly whilst Russia is at the point (as it currently is) of some weakness.
I've supported Ukraine from the beginning, including by donating large amounts of my own money to the cause, but I can see there are now great dangers in the 'beat back Putin' narrative which is emerging and is espoused by western governments.
You seem determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
A time might be reached, perhaps next year, where it is pragmatic to pause the conflict to create some time to prepare Ukraine for the next round, and to rebuild civilian infrastructure.
But I think it is not pragmatism, but fantasy, to think that you can create a resolution of the conflict with Putin as the counterparty. It's just not credible. He's not interested.
. But even those who stayed the course with Truss throughout the leadership campaign are now convinced she will be "out by Christmas". "Boris had no beliefs but Liz has got far too many," another MP said. "She believes in policies rather than people. Even Theresa May believed in people and communities. Liz is all ideology. The big thing, the big question, is can we get rid of her without the public saying, 'You’re a complete bunch of clowns'? And if not, does that even matter?”
Redbox. Gets Truss to a T.
The anonymous briefings by MP's - or frankly it could all be the same one, are fairly despicable. If a landslide Labour victory occurs, at least some of this foul, festering brood will be forced to get a proper job.
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think that, under the powers of the War Production Act, the US government can intervene to ensure Starlink continues to operate for Ukraine. So government's give themselves powers in war to prevent one person having so much power (or, at least, making the one person with that power the elected head of government).
Did not know that!
Asking someone to do something without being paid doesn't come under the Act - there was a specific case on this in WWII.
What is not allowed is refusal to do something after being asked by the government and offer a fair price.
Nearly every country I can think of has some version of such powers - government takes stuff over in time of national emergency.
As we saw during the pandemic. Like it or not, wars and pandemics require collective action.
SpaceX should be proud of what they’re doing in Ukraine. From previous reports, their systems made a massive difference in the early part of the conflict, as the enemy attacked ground-based communications.
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think the Tories would steal the policies. They’ve no saleable ideas of their own.
They wouldn't be credible stealing policies - and if they tried, it would be a massive win for Sir Keir. He could say to the public "you get our policies either way, you might as well get us".
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think the biggest problem the Conservatives have is that there's no longer a real market for the neoliberal small-state Thatcherite approach to politics they were brought up on. And they simply can't figure out what to do next. This stretches back to Cameron/Osborne's time and before with the GFC.
People don't want their own taxes increased, and they want a balanced budget, but they'd rather have things funded properly, and that means more tax on capital. To do anything else would need real evidence it would massively boost growth, and that doesn't seem to exist. The Western paradigm has changed since the 1980s.
I don't know how long it will take the Conservatives to figure this out - that investment is needed in science, technology, education and skills to get to growth with more taxes on capital/superwealthy and it can't easily be gamed with tax cuts like its still 1988 - but I suspect they can only do so from Opposition.
👇👇👇@edconwaysky right: are No10 more worried about politics than economics
I'm told organisationally some people inside think it's a shambles in No10 - lack of process, lack of grip, unclear role of Fullbrook on policy, unfiltered official advice going to the top. It's a mess
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
There should be. What does he have to hide?
He doesn't have anything to hide, but he also isn't in government and potentially 2 years away from a GE, so there is no real pressure for him to. Opposition is a great place to point out what the government are doing wrong and say you would do it better, but in vague fluffy language.
Chris Bryant @RhonddaBryant · 55m There isn’t a unity candidate for Tory leader. It’s not a united party. It can’t govern.
That is a very real risk. Truss cannot govern. Any replacement must be a unity candidate. It looks increasingly clear that MPs won't back one of the failed leadership candidates just rejected, and Sunak - the one MPs did back - was rejected by members.
So we're back to resurrecting Johnson (disgraced out of office), May (hounded out of office but with a new Cassandra confidence), or find someone completely leftfield like Wallace.
Or - more likely - apocalypse along until it finally collapses in utter disarray. Ordinarily external events like Russia blowing up power / gas interconnects might help a government in the midst of a winter cold/dark crisis. But this lot? Their ministers sneer at people who are cold and hungry - they *promote* the worst of the worst. Look at the Education department as a prime example.
So the new low of 19% won't stay as the low. A crisis GE in the depths of winter because the government has literally ceased to function remains a viable scenario.
At some point in all of this, he’s going to seriously piss off someone with the power to damage his business interests.
No wonder Congress keep telling NASA to purse alternate launch systems. They can't have that fucking chubby maniac having a monopoly.
Monopolies are almost universally a bad thing.
Someone else needs to step up and make a rocket, because SLS is showing the world how not to do it, and how not to do it whilst spending billions not doing it.
Unfortunately, yes it is rocket science!
SLS etc won't get anywhere, because it is designed as a mechanism to spread government money through a pyramid of people and companies, picked by the politicians. In return the people and companies give campaign contributions. The actually spaceflight bit is not important.
Bezos is demonstrating that spending large amounts of money on spaceflight doesn't necessarily get you spaceflight.
Branson is taking some people for a very expensive ride
Various new small launch companies are doing good work - in the coming recession*, there will be a brutal cull, though.
At ULA, Tory Bruno is doing his best. He is not allowed to build a reusable rocket - that is forbidden by the parent companies (LockMart and Boeing). Vulcan is what he is allowed to do. Even the long duration second stage stuff has been pulled back. The words "propellant depot" are more toxic to some in Congress than "woke"...
In Europe, about Arianespace has it's collective head up it's arse. ESA is trying to make some move towards reusable rocketry. A Falcon 9 clone for 2035 isn't a plan though..
In China, various startups talk bout copying SpaceX.
Quite simply, there is no-one on the near horizon for space launch as a competitor.
In LEO constellations, OneWeb is the only near term competitor. All the other are vapourware at the moment. Bezos bought literally all the spare launch capacity** in the world***, but has produced no satellites as yet.
*Interestingly, a year or 2 back, Musk was being savaged for predicting that the current economic bubble would burst.
**Because he has no prospect of launching his own rockets in the next couple of years.
***That is open market - he can't launch from China.
The only way the Tory party can even try to save itself.
1) Ditch Truss/KK 2) Appoint someone else which can put a degree of trust. No membership vote. Rishi, Hunt, even Gove 3) Put through solid structural reforms on economy and tax. 4) Commit to a general election date in May 2023
They have to be prepared to be sorry, and be prepared to lose in 2023. It might make the difference of 50-60 seats being saved, and the difference between be over or sub 100 seats.
If the Conservatives get round to thinking that it's about cutting losses and saving a few of the nicer bits of furniture, the strategy and tactics become pretty obvious. Maybe they can even use their mortality as a superpower- do the unpopular things on freeing up planning everywhere because they are the right thing to do and they are going to lose anyway.
But political minds, even smart ones, struggle with "we're about to lose".
“When you tweeted ‘Rishi speaks out against fairytale economics’, whose economics was he describing as fairytale and what were the plans that he thought were fairytale?"
Nick Robinson gives Sunak-supporter-turned-Truss-loyalist Greg Hands a proper doing
56% for Rejoin, excluding DK/abstain, so not far out of line with previous polling.
Rejoin is clearly not a minority position, though won't be on the cards in England next GE for a major party. (I am not sure of the Green position).
I would expect in the election after next, a case to be made, probably by the Lib Dems at least (maybe labour) for rejoining the Single market/EEA etc.
I expect it to be pretty popular.
The solution, like with Macron and the EPC, is to have a wider orbit of nation states that have closer economic and political ties with the inner EU but are still outside it. Flexibility.
The EU generally has terrible relations with its neighbours (our very own Alastair Meeks has pointed out the same) and it needs to move on from its fortress Europe approach for that to change.
I don't agree with the political caricature you've given there, the Conservatives are interested in measures that maximise growth in the economy not "giving to the rich", which is a tired shibboleth, but on the rest I agree.
If you junk the role of the Office for Budget Responsibility then the markets will conclude, not irrationally, that you intend to be irresponsible with the budget.
The central priorities of the Tory govt of the past 12 years have been anti-growth (Brexit, austerity).
That is a very real risk. Truss cannot govern. Any replacement must be a unity candidate. It looks increasingly clear that MPs won't back one of the failed leadership candidates just rejected, and Sunak - the one MPs did back - was rejected by members.
So we're back to resurrecting Johnson (disgraced out of office), May (hounded out of office but with a new Cassandra confidence), or find someone completely leftfield like Wallace.
Or - more likely - apocalypse along until it finally collapses in utter disarray.
Fraser Nelson, in his "into the valley of Death" Telegraph article says exactly this.
The very worst case scenario is Truss abandons her entire agenda to salvage the economy, but then limps on in office with no purpose, or support
At some point in all of this, he’s going to seriously piss off someone with the power to damage his business interests.
No wonder Congress keep telling NASA to purse alternate launch systems. They can't have that fucking chubby maniac having a monopoly.
Monopolies are almost universally a bad thing.
Someone else needs to step up and make a rocket, because SLS is showing the world how not to do it, and how not to do it whilst spending billions not doing it.
Unfortunately, yes it is rocket science!
I've always thought that the rocket engineering is the really hard part. The science is fairly settled; the challenge is making the stuff that's reliable, cheap, reuseable etc etc.
Elon - why? I know you need money but this really isn’t a good look
He’s making a right idiot of himself here, and I say that as someone who quite likes what he’s doing with SpaceX.
Sadly, appeasement towards Russia is now quite mainstream thinking in the US, across the whole political spectrum. There’s an awful lot of people suggesting that Ukraine should sue for peace, or that it’s no longer in the US interest to keep supporting Ukraine now Putin is threatening nuclear escalation.
This is, of course, exactly what Putin wants. Thankfully, most Western leaders remain behind arming Ukraine.
Thankfully another quiet night there last night, with only a handful of missiles launched, more than half of which were shot down. Steady advances by the defenders in Kherson region too, they’re now only about 5km from the airport in the West of the city, and have retaken more than half the occupied lands in the North of the region, in the past couple of weeks.
It does sound a bit 1917 out there. This story is going around:
That doesn’t sound good, if there’s any truth to it. Also reports that Russian civilians in Kherson are being told to leave - how exactly they’re supposed to leave, is a different question. The bridges are all full of holes, and even the supply barge across the river was sunk last week.
Is there any objective appraisal out there of how the Ukrainians have been treating Russians (military and civilian) in the areas they have recaptured? I have seen a few comments about atrocities but nothing on the scale of Russian crimes. Is this because the Ukrainians are more disciplined or because they are better at controlling the news?
They’re better at the PR game without a shadow of a doubt. Whether that means they are managing to keep any wrongdoing under wraps or that they are more disciplined because they rely on western public opinion I couldn’t say. Maybe neither and they just treat their prisoners better.
If they were treating prisoners like the Russians do the West would not be supporting them in the way they are
War is war, and awful things always happen in wars. I’m sure that, if there were serious atrocities on the Ukranian side, some Western media will have picked it up.
There have been tales of Russian collaborators in the recaptured areas being shot out of hand, but not many.
Could be several reasons for that:
1) The Ukrainians are more disciplined than the Russians;
2) They are taking over their own territory and their own people, to protect them, while the avowed war aim of the Russians is to wipe Ukraine off the map (or 'genocide' as we call it);
3) There are fewer Russian collaborators than there are Ukrainians resisting the Russians;
4) Any Russian collaborators have fled with the Russian army;
5) It isn't actually the job of the AFU to deal with crimes in the occupied territories so a separate unit, that isn't under combat stress, is dealing with them more appropriately;
6) The Ukrainians have a more effective comms operation and are keeping any atrocities by their army under wraps, whereas Russia is actually literally flaunting them on TV;
7) There aren't many people in the reconquered areas due to having fled the fighting anyway.
It's probably in most cases a mixture of several of those, but that would explain it.
Also,
8) Quite a few collaborators have been killed before the AFU have retaken territory by partisan activity.
9) The Ukrainians recognise there is value in capturing collaborators because they can then be used in prisoner exchanges.
10) If the stories of how the pro-Russian governments in the areas taken by Russia in 2014 are vaguely true, and they behaved in the same way in the freshly occupied areas, then quite a few people may have actively changed their minds about who to support.
It's more likely that those in the previously occupied territories who might have switched sides have already got out (or been killed) - as reported by someone who experienced life there. https://newrepublic.com/article/168106/stanislav-aseyev-writer-ukraine-russian-torture ...Aseyev, 33, was born in Donetsk and grew up in the nearby town of Makiivka. After the war with Russia broke out in 2014 and many other educated young people fled eastern Ukraine, he stayed. He wrote under the pen name Stanislav Vasin to protect his identity. At the time of his capture, he was filing reports for the Ukrainian news magazine Mirror Weekly and U.S.-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. In the breakaway region that he described as “your basic criminal underworld that has grown to the scale of a state,” he wrote about everyday life punctuated by incidents of extreme violence, like militants summarily executing a man in broad daylight. Some of those articles turned into a book, In Isolation: Dispatches From Occupied Donbas, which was translated and published by Harvard University Press. He later wrote about his captivity in a second book, The Torture Camp on Paradise Street, which is scheduled to be published in English in December...
...A sharp chronicler of the Donbas, Aseyev said most of the people still remaining in the region are pro-Russian and have Russian passports, but they are also indifferent to Putin’s recent sham annexation. “Now, the main question is where to get water? No one even reflects on what is happening.” He added, “Most of the pro-Ukrainian people left. Those who remain, but from time to time, they end up in basements” like the place where he was tortured...
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think the biggest problem the Conservatives have is that there's no longer a real market for the neoliberal small-state Thatcherite approach to politics they were brought up on. And they simply can't figure out what to do next. This stretches back to Cameron/Osborne's time and before with the GFC.
People don't want their own taxes increased, and they want a balanced budget, but they'd rather have things funded properly, and that means more tax on capital. To do anything else would need real evidence it would massively boost growth, and that doesn't seem to exist. The Western paradigm has changed since the 1980s.
I don't know how long it will take the Conservatives to figure this out - that investment is needed in science, technology, education and skills to get to growth with more taxes on capital/superwealthy and it can't easily be gamed with tax cuts like its still 1988 - but I suspect they can only do so from Opposition.
So called 'neoliberalism' is based on the simple tenets of Adam Smith. Those have not changed, they are immutable. As for their not being 'a market' for these ideas, look at the economies of the non-West - you know, the ones that are actually growing rather than in seemingly terminal decline?
Pearl-clutching over Truss from Tory supporters is sadly 'the new normal' here on PB. But this horseshit is a whole new level of pathetic.
That is a very real risk. Truss cannot govern. Any replacement must be a unity candidate. It looks increasingly clear that MPs won't back one of the failed leadership candidates just rejected, and Sunak - the one MPs did back - was rejected by members.
So we're back to resurrecting Johnson (disgraced out of office), May (hounded out of office but with a new Cassandra confidence), or find someone completely leftfield like Wallace.
Or - more likely - apocalypse along until it finally collapses in utter disarray.
Fraser Nelson, in his "into the valley of Death" Telegraph article says exactly this.
The very worst case scenario is Truss abandons her entire agenda to salvage the economy, but then limps on in office with no purpose, or support
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
There should be. What does he have to hide?
He doesn't have anything to hide, but he also isn't in government and potentially 2 years away from a GE, so there is no real pressure for him to. Opposition is a great place to point out what the government are doing wrong and say you would do it better, but in vague fluffy language.
If he doesn't have anything to hide, he has nothing to lose by announcing his popular policies.
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think the biggest problem the Conservatives have is that there's no longer a real market for the neoliberal small-state Thatcherite approach to politics they were brought up on. And they simply can't figure out what to do next. This stretches back to Cameron/Osborne's time and before with the GFC.
People don't want their own taxes increased, and they want a balanced budget, but they'd rather have things funded properly, and that means more tax on capital. To do anything else would need real evidence it would massively boost growth, and that doesn't seem to exist. The Western paradigm has changed since the 1980s.
I don't know how long it will take the Conservatives to figure this out - that investment is needed in science, technology, education and skills to get to growth with more taxes on capital/superwealthy and it can't easily be gamed with tax cuts like its still 1988 - but I suspect they can only do so from Opposition.
Cynics say that no-one ever changes their mind, but I read this post and I think back to all the arguments we've had on here over the years and it's clear the cynics are wrong.
Not a major change, not a damascene conversion, but a change in emphasis all the same. It's to your credit.
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think the biggest problem the Conservatives have is that there's no longer a real market for the neoliberal small-state Thatcherite approach to politics they were brought up on. And they simply can't figure out what to do next. This stretches back to Cameron/Osborne's time and before with the GFC.
People don't want their own taxes increased, and they want a balanced budget, but they'd rather have things funded properly, and that means more tax on capital. To do anything else would need real evidence it would massively boost growth, and that doesn't seem to exist. The Western paradigm has changed since the 1980s.
I don't know how long it will take the Conservatives to figure this out - that investment is needed in science, technology, education and skills to get to growth with more taxes on capital/superwealthy and it can't easily be gamed with tax cuts like its still 1988 - but I suspect they can only do so from Opposition.
I think most people want a progressive taxation system, where those who earn more are taxed more, and that pays for the delivery of good public services. Over the last decade we've seen the opposite, a view that giving the wealthy more capital will lead to them spending that on investment or whatever, and therefore the wealth will "trickle down". At the same time public infrastructure at all levels has had central investment disappearing and tied to things like private housing developments or whatever.
The biggest issue at the moment is people see their tax money go out, but don't see any benefits of it in society. Are more schools or doctors surgeries being built? Are roads well kept? Is the nearest hospital doing well? All the bedrock things we believe the government should provide are either falling apart or have been flogged off. Add that to the constant litany from the media about benefits to the "undeserving" and people start feeling aggrieved at their tax bill. I've never once been annoyed at the idea of paying my fair share of taxes - I'm more annoyed knowing it doesn't go where it is needed most and that people earning 100 times what I do are probably finding ways to pay less than I do as a proportion of my income.
56% for Rejoin, excluding DK/abstain, so not far out of line with previous polling.
Rejoin is clearly not a minority position, though won't be on the cards in England next GE for a major party. (I am not sure of the Green position).
I would expect in the election after next, a case to be made, probably by the Lib Dems at least (maybe labour) for rejoining the Single market/EEA etc.
I expect it to be pretty popular.
There's a sense that nobody wants to poke the wasp nest right now, but something would have to happen to break the current trend and demographics.
So how should the current government respond? They could make a gentle Eurodrift harder by seeking to nail Britain down in a different place, but have they got the time or authority to do that? And might that just annoy some voters even more if it's too blatant?
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think the biggest problem the Conservatives have is that there's no longer a real market for the neoliberal small-state Thatcherite approach to politics they were brought up on. And they simply can't figure out what to do next. This stretches back to Cameron/Osborne's time and before with the GFC.
People don't want their own taxes increased, and they want a balanced budget, but they'd rather have things funded properly, and that means more tax on capital. To do anything else would need real evidence it would massively boost growth, and that doesn't seem to exist. The Western paradigm has changed since the 1980s.
I don't know how long it will take the Conservatives to figure this out - that investment is needed in science, technology, education and skills to get to growth with more taxes on capital/superwealthy and it can't easily be gamed with tax cuts like its still 1988 - but I suspect they can only do so from Opposition.
So called 'neoliberalism' is based on the simple tenets of Adam Smith. Those have not changed, they are immutable. As for their not being 'a market' for these ideas, look at the economies of the non-West - you know, the ones that are actually growing rather than in seemingly terminal decline?
Pearl-clutching over Truss from Tory supporters is sadly 'the new normal' here on PB. But this horseshit is a whole new level of pathetic.
Have you considered that the economies of the non-West might be underdeveloped next to ours and have very different demographics?
It's highly simplistic reasoning and analysis, like you've laid out above, that's got us into this mess.
They were strong runners up amongst MPs/members and Mordaunt can do empathy and public speaking (if she's otherwise an empty vessel) and Sunak knows his numbers.
It will have to do.
Mordaunt, unlike Sunak, sucked up to Truss to get a job. Unlike him, she was saying last week that the policies are fine just the communication was bad. Her Ministerial experience is limited and she is inclined to dissemble.
Whoever is needed now cannot be another inexperienced Minister learning on the job. And why should Sunak who won the majority of MP votes give way to her anyway? Financial and economic expertise is needed now. Sunak is hardly ideal but he is a lot better than the alternatives.
That is a very real risk. Truss cannot govern. Any replacement must be a unity candidate. It looks increasingly clear that MPs won't back one of the failed leadership candidates just rejected, and Sunak - the one MPs did back - was rejected by members.
So we're back to resurrecting Johnson (disgraced out of office), May (hounded out of office but with a new Cassandra confidence), or find someone completely leftfield like Wallace.
Or - more likely - apocalypse along until it finally collapses in utter disarray.
Fraser Nelson, in his "into the valley of Death" Telegraph article says exactly this.
The very worst case scenario is Truss abandons her entire agenda to salvage the economy, but then limps on in office with no purpose, or support
Abandoning your entire agenda in a time of national crisis could work. "We tried to do this, we're facing a huge challenge, we have to focus entirely on that".
Instead what do we have? They're still insisting there is no energy supply crisis. Or any need to even prepare people for conserving energy. That the doubling of bills vs last winter is problem solved. That any cash increase in wages / benefits is sufficient because its "more" regardless of the swamping of "more" by the real cost of living. Etc etc etc etc.
And worse still we have the way ministers deal with problems. With people. With institutions. Arrogance. Sneering. Belittling. These are not the people we need to work our way out of a wet paper bag, never mind the winter we face.
Matt Goodwin sitting on the fence as to whether this government should be disembowelled or merely executed. He is strangely unimpressed by Tories who think that working class northerners vote Tory to give big breaks to bankers. What on earth gave him that idea?
That very much depends on where you are, and which direction you are looking...
Tbf I am at the docks looking NE.
We had the drama of a helicopter pickup for a.passenger airlifted to Truro hospital last night; the ship didn't even slow down for the first two attempts and then grudgingly slowed to half speed to get the passenger away; the cruise line must be really keen not to waste fuel...
Good trip? I have long fancied that Transatlantic crossing. Any tips?
Definitely one for the bucket list; it is surely the world's greatest ship and hopefully has another ten years of life in it. Either book early for maximum choice or wait and snap up a last minute bargain.
Westbound is most popular because of the dramatic morning sailing into New York harbour, although westbound is an always-windy crossing into the prevailing wind, whereas coming eastbound you get calm days when there's next to no wind and sitting on deck is a joy.
Paying extra for a balcony is probably a waste of money as you won't use it much and there is no shortage of good spots to sit out around the ship.
The winter crossings are popular with those seeking the experience of really rough seas, and many are disappointed if they don't get them. On summer the mid Atlantic can be surprisingly calm and it's just the sheer size and absence of anything to see other than the odd whale and dolphins that makes the biggest impression.
Those in eras past who made the journey over months in small wooden boats and ships were brave fellows indeed.....
I was thinking an inside cabin, as would be on deck anyway most of the time, and save the money for what matters.
Any recommendations on the dining options?
I had a inside cabin my first trip, and you're right that it's no big deal. This time I did have a large window and that does make for a more pleasant environment although I didn't spent much time sitting looking out of it.
They're currently meddling with the dining arrangements, but the traditional plan is two sittings, one at 6.15pm and one at 8pm. The early sitting is more popular esp with the elderly passengers and those who like to go straight on to the shows. The later sitting attracts a more mixed crowd and feels more relaxed; if you get a good table discussion and drinks can go on without having to rush off.
Because of the almost daily clock changes - an hour back each day westbound and the reverse eastbound, I find that early sitting works best going west - your body feels like dinner is getting an hour later each day, whereas coming east you really want late sitting because the clocks go forward lunchtime.
They are trialling more flexible open dining with various rumours about how it will end up.
Labour’s 21-point lead is its highest in an Ipsos poll since October 2002, though its methodology has changed over the years.
Labour has its highest vote share since November 2012, and the Conservatives their lowest since June 2019.
One in five 2019 Conservative voters now say they have switched to Labour.
67 per cent of adults are dissatisfied with Ms Truss, up 38 points on last month, with 16 per cent satisfied, down 11 points, and 17 per cent say they “don’t know”, down 27 points.
Her net satisfaction score of -51 is worse than the lowest scores for Boris Johnson (-46), Theresa May (-44), David Cameron (-38) and Tony Blair (-44).
It is similar to Gordon Brown during the 2007/08 financial crisis (-51), but not as bad as John Major (-59) or Margaret Thatcher (-56). But no PM has fallen to this low level so quickly.
Current Conservative voters are split over Ms Truss’ performance, with 40 per cent satisfied and 39 per cent dissatisfied. The majority (56 per cent) of 2019 Conservative voters are dissatisfied.
While Sir Keir Starmer’s ratings are improving, they are not soaring despite the Government’s woes. Thirty-eight per cent per cent of voters are satisfied with him, up seven points on last month, 39 per ent dissatisfied, down six points.
His net satisfaction of -1 is his highest score since February last year when it was +5.
His satisfaction ratings among Labour supporters have risen 11 points to 61 per cent.
Four in five adults are dissatisfied with the Government, up ten points, while just 11 per cent are satisfied. down nine points.
This net satisfaction score of -69 is similar to the worst under Johnson of -67, but not as bad as under Major (-78) and May (-77), but worse than under Cameron (-45), Brown (-62), Blair (-47) and Thatcher (-63).
So this says to me voters are clearly against Truss and her vision for a Conservative government under her, but aren't exactly sold on SKS either. So there is a chance just the swapping out of LT and KK would help, but Lab would still likely have the edge if the damage has been done.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
I think the biggest problem the Conservatives have is that there's no longer a real market for the neoliberal small-state Thatcherite approach to politics they were brought up on. And they simply can't figure out what to do next. This stretches back to Cameron/Osborne's time and before with the GFC.
People don't want their own taxes increased, and they want a balanced budget, but they'd rather have things funded properly, and that means more tax on capital. To do anything else would need real evidence it would massively boost growth, and that doesn't seem to exist. The Western paradigm has changed since the 1980s.
I don't know how long it will take the Conservatives to figure this out - that investment is needed in science, technology, education and skills to get to growth with more taxes on capital/superwealthy and it can't easily be gamed with tax cuts like its still 1988 - but I suspect they can only do so from Opposition.
Cynics say that no-one ever changes their mind, but I read this post and I think back to all the arguments we've had on here over the years and it's clear the cynics are wrong.
Not a major change, not a damascene conversion, but a change in emphasis all the same. It's to your credit.
Thanks. I haven't become a Lefty - far from it - but when the facts change I change my views, as all good Conservatives should.
The objective here should be to maximise the wealth and strength of the nation. Income is overtaxed, capital is undertaxed, and to generate more long-term growth we need more investment in our human and social capital. Simple capital tax cuts and slashing of regulations don't do it anymore.
For balance, I would also tweak the funding model of the NHS and pensions to suit (where I think the State spends too much) but I accept there is little political appetite for that.
After getting to lay no hoper Rishi at reasonable prices at the last Con Next Leader market I can't believe I'm getting to do it immediately again at even more reasonable prices!!!?!
They were strong runners up amongst MPs/members and Mordaunt can do empathy and public speaking (if she's otherwise an empty vessel) and Sunak knows his numbers.
It will have to do.
Was it the Daily Mail that did a hatchet job on Mordaunt during the leadership campaign? Surely they must see now she'd have done a better job than Truss.
It was her Wokery, and lying about it, that sunk her.
Anyway, needs must.
Penny would have been better sticking to her guns and defending her liberal views. Trying to pander to the Wokefinder Generals did her in.
There is nothing liberal about Woke.
You need to learn and understand this.
Woke (as a noun rather than a verb and even then it’s archaic) is an invention of the Right to demonise their opponents. If you see anyone using the word it’s a tell. They’re a reactionary. It’s the right’s rebadge of “PC gone mad” for boomers.
It has been explained repeatedly to you on here, repeatedly, that it's about an obsession with classifying people by identity group and treating them as members of that group accordingly, rather than as individuals, and is therefore in direct opposition to enlightenment values.
None so blind.
The Enlightenment was financed by, and very very ambivalent or silent about, black slavery. Hume and Locke invested in slaves and plantations. Voltaire was against but did have this to say
«Leurs yeux ronds, leur nez épaté, leurs lèvres toujours grosses, leurs oreilles différemment figurées, la laine de leur tête, la mesure même de leur intelligence, mettent entre eux et les autres espèces d’hommes des différences prodigieuses »: Essai sur les moeurs, INTRODUCTION.[1]
(Their round eyes, their flattened nose, their lips which are always large, their differently shaped ears, the wool of their head, that very measure of their intelligence, place prodigious differences between them and the other species of men.)
«[Ε]t ils n’ont d’homme que la stature du corps, avec la faculté de la parole et de la pensée dans un degré très éloigné du nôtre. Tels sont ceux que j’ai vus et examinés»: Essai sur les moeurs, INTRODUCTION.[2]
(And they are not men, except in their stature, with the faculty of speech and thought at a degree far distant to ours. Such are the ones that I have seen and examined.)
«[Ε]t on peut dire que si leur intelligence n’est pas d’une autre espèce que notre entendement, elle est fort inférieure. Ils ne sont pas capables d’une grande attention; ils combinent peu, et ne paraissent faits ni pour les avantages ni pour les abus de notre philosophie»: Essai sur les moeurs, κεφ. CXLI.[3]
(And one could say that if their intelligence is not of another species than ours, then it is greatly inferior. They are not capable of paying much attention; they mingle very little, and they do not appear to be made either for the advantages or the abuses of our philosophy.)
There are historical contexts where it makes sense on all possible levels to classify people by identity group. In 1930s Germany whether someone had a GSOH, liked long walks on the beach and had read Proust in the original mattered a lot less than whether they were Jewish.
What about slavery now wrt the Uyghurs?
Or, closer to home, Braverman's decision to reclassify modern slavery as illegal immigration. Which seems ..... odd.
I think that the problem we must face is that there may not be an end to the war in Ukraine. If Russia can hold a line using mobilised troops, then surely it will, and we know it can take unlimited human losses, because Russians will not rise up against their government. It could just go on for years like this. How many billions can the US pump in to it and how much economic harm can Europe take? Is it indefinete?
The problem that people must see is that there is a very high risk of a sudden political capitulation in Europe and the US over this winter, resulting in withdrawal of political support for the funding of the war in Ukraine at the current levels. This is probably what the 'master strategist' Putin is expecting to happen. There are murmurs of it all over the place, particularly in the US.
There is no way of shutting this type of thinking down in a democracy. The Ukrainian propoganda machine has done a brilliant job to date but it cannot go on like this indefinetly. How deep and resolute is western support for Ukraine? Could the people currently waving Ukrainian flags on Council estates be swayed by the narrative that we are being bankrupted by a woke LGBTQI+ conspiracy? What about all the refugees that we have taken in and expect to be housed indefinetly, whilst a large part of Ukraine is not affected by the fighting?
The position of the French, or trying to find a solution along the lines suggested by Elon Musk, is not totally stupid. If you are going to keep supporting the war, you need to work out what your endgame is and how likely that it will be achieved, and at what cost. I would say that there are two problems, one being that it is unlikely that the war can ultimately actually be won on any conventional level; and secondly that given the political dynamics of Russia, any replacement for Putin and his regime is unlikely to be favourable to our long term interests.
I don't want to like it, but I see your point. However, the west needs to support Ukraine as long as it can.... and then longer still. Russia has messed up. Europe is pivoting away from Russia. It will take longer than this winter, but once it is over, it is likely that many European countries will pivot from Russian energy permanently, not least just because of Russia, but because of climate change. Russia has badly messed this one up.
The real danger here isn't Ukraine losing (that isn't very likely anymore), the real danger is Russia losing. Russia will (I hope) lose. But there won't be any Ukrainian troops in Moscow, or anywhere else in Russia. Putin will be deposed, but the people in Russia will be told they were stabbed in the back by NATO. We would've won but for those meddling kids.
A stab in the back narrative is now almost certain in Russia. I'm trying to think, but I'm sure no country has ever faced such a situation where a stab in the back myth develops after a major war they lost, where their territory wasn't occupied. I'm sure it'll all work out just fine and nothing major will happen twenty years later. /s
But there is no answer to this. I'm not prepared to see Ukraine lose, but Russia itself will never accept its own defeat. We're going to get away with this one. My daughter however, might not see 30.
Comments
https://twitter.com/theousherwood/status/1580838468376178688
Tesla shares, where most of his funding for the Twitter buyout is coming, are also down nearly 50% in the past few months, as markets start to treat them as more of a manufacturing company and less of a tech stock, and they now face more serious competition from established carmakers.
I've supported Ukraine from the beginning, including by donating large amounts of my own money to the cause, but I can see there are now great dangers in the 'beat back Putin' narrative which is emerging and is espoused by western governments.
The headline voting figures not such a good poll for Labour this one though as Previous polls from this firm tend to be a tad Labour friendly.
Someone else needs to step up and make a rocket, because SLS is showing the world how not to do it, and how not to do it whilst spending billions not doing it.
Unfortunately, yes it is rocket science!
https://weather-and-climate.com/average-monthly-Rainfall-Temperature-Sunshine,kherson-kherson-ua,Ukraine
In addition, since the Germans came by for a holiday, there are many, many more metalled roads, better gravel minor roads and the drainage for farming has massively reduced the mud factor in a number of places.
When you add in the fact that modern vehicles have vastly higher power to weight ratios, and the good ones have much better "flotation".... General Mud may not be victorious after all.
I expect it to be pretty popular.
Ukraine has military discipline where Russia doesn't; only one of the two sides has invited and given access to UN observers on an ongoing basis; and I don't think there's a great deal of independent journalism going on in occupied territories.
And if Ukraine is running torture chambers, then they've managed to keep it very quiet indeed.
What is not allowed is refusal to do something after being asked by the government and offer a fair price.
Nearly every country I can think of has some version of such powers - government takes stuff over in time of national emergency.
I mean, there is no rush for SKS to start presenting policy solutions, there is no imminent GE (yet) and he isn't in government. There is a possibility that when that time comes things could move depending on the popularity of his policies. If they are like the broadband policy that was in the news, a means tested version of what Corbyn proposed from my limited understanding, then Lab could be seen as a place with policy proposals that benefit the poorest.
In the North of the country, it will be muddy now but freeze next month, with the big thaw at the beginning of March, as we saw last year.
My report outside the British embassy here in Washington DC just after the Chancellor hurriedly left for the airport rushed back from the IMF talks a day early… because he was “v v keen to talk to MPs” and ministers about the Debt plan, we were told https://twitter.com/faisalislam/status/1580844128459685889/video/1
Chris Bryant
@RhonddaBryant
·
55m
There isn’t a unity candidate for Tory leader. It’s not a united party. It can’t govern.
A time might be reached, perhaps next year, where it is pragmatic to pause the conflict to create some time to prepare Ukraine for the next round, and to rebuild civilian infrastructure.
But I think it is not pragmatism, but fantasy, to think that you can create a resolution of the conflict with Putin as the counterparty. It's just not credible. He's not interested.
SpaceX should be proud of what they’re doing in Ukraine. From previous reports, their systems made a massive difference in the early part of the conflict, as the enemy attacked ground-based communications.
People don't want their own taxes increased, and they want a balanced budget, but they'd rather have things funded properly, and that means more tax on capital. To do anything else would need real evidence it would massively boost growth, and that doesn't seem to exist. The Western paradigm has changed since the 1980s.
I don't know how long it will take the Conservatives to figure this out - that investment is needed in science, technology, education and skills to get to growth with more taxes on capital/superwealthy and it can't easily be gamed with tax cuts like its still 1988 - but I suspect they can only do so from Opposition.
I'm told organisationally some people inside think it's a shambles in No10 - lack of process, lack of grip, unclear role of Fullbrook on policy, unfiltered official advice going to the top. It's a mess
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1580835242163679237
So we're back to resurrecting Johnson (disgraced out of office), May (hounded out of office but with a new Cassandra confidence), or find someone completely leftfield like Wallace.
Or - more likely - apocalypse along until it finally collapses in utter disarray. Ordinarily external events like Russia blowing up power / gas interconnects might help a government in the midst of a winter cold/dark crisis. But this lot? Their ministers sneer at people who are cold and hungry - they *promote* the worst of the worst. Look at the Education department as a prime example.
So the new low of 19% won't stay as the low. A crisis GE in the depths of winter because the government has literally ceased to function remains a viable scenario.
Bezos is demonstrating that spending large amounts of money on spaceflight doesn't necessarily get you spaceflight.
Branson is taking some people for a very expensive ride
Various new small launch companies are doing good work - in the coming recession*, there will be a brutal cull, though.
At ULA, Tory Bruno is doing his best. He is not allowed to build a reusable rocket - that is forbidden by the parent companies (LockMart and Boeing). Vulcan is what he is allowed to do. Even the long duration second stage stuff has been pulled back. The words "propellant depot" are more toxic to some in Congress than "woke"...
In Europe, about Arianespace has it's collective head up it's arse. ESA is trying to make some move towards reusable rocketry. A Falcon 9 clone for 2035 isn't a plan though..
In China, various startups talk bout copying SpaceX.
Quite simply, there is no-one on the near horizon for space launch as a competitor.
In LEO constellations, OneWeb is the only near term competitor. All the other are vapourware at the moment. Bezos bought literally all the spare launch capacity** in the world***, but has produced no satellites as yet.
*Interestingly, a year or 2 back, Musk was being savaged for predicting that the current economic bubble would burst.
**Because he has no prospect of launching his own rockets in the next couple of years.
***That is open market - he can't launch from China.
But political minds, even smart ones, struggle with "we're about to lose".
Nick Robinson gives Sunak-supporter-turned-Truss-loyalist Greg Hands a proper doing
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nick-robinson-tells-minister-you-are-insulting-peoples-intelligence_uk_6349186fe4b0e376dc0b04a2
The EU generally has terrible relations with its neighbours (our very own Alastair Meeks has pointed out the same) and it needs to move on from its fortress Europe approach for that to change.
The very worst case scenario is Truss abandons her entire agenda to salvage the economy, but then limps on in office with no purpose, or support
https://newrepublic.com/article/168106/stanislav-aseyev-writer-ukraine-russian-torture
...Aseyev, 33, was born in Donetsk and grew up in the nearby town of Makiivka. After the war with Russia broke out in 2014 and many other educated young people fled eastern Ukraine, he stayed. He wrote under the pen name Stanislav Vasin to protect his identity. At the time of his capture, he was filing reports for the Ukrainian news magazine Mirror Weekly and U.S.-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty. In the breakaway region that he described as “your basic criminal underworld that has grown to the scale of a state,” he wrote about everyday life punctuated by incidents of extreme violence, like militants summarily executing a man in broad daylight. Some of those articles turned into a book, In Isolation: Dispatches From Occupied Donbas, which was translated and published by Harvard University Press. He later wrote about his captivity in a second book, The Torture Camp on Paradise Street, which is scheduled to be published in English in December...
...A sharp chronicler of the Donbas, Aseyev said most of the people still remaining in the region are pro-Russian and have Russian passports, but they are also indifferent to Putin’s recent sham annexation. “Now, the main question is where to get water? No one even reflects on what is happening.” He added, “Most of the pro-Ukrainian people left. Those who remain, but from time to time, they end up in basements” like the place where he was tortured...
Pearl-clutching over Truss from Tory supporters is sadly 'the new normal' here on PB. But this horseshit is a whole new level of pathetic.
u-turned on a money bill
Not a major change, not a damascene conversion, but a change in emphasis all the same. It's to your credit.
The biggest issue at the moment is people see their tax money go out, but don't see any benefits of it in society. Are more schools or doctors surgeries being built? Are roads well kept? Is the nearest hospital doing well? All the bedrock things we believe the government should provide are either falling apart or have been flogged off. Add that to the constant litany from the media about benefits to the "undeserving" and people start feeling aggrieved at their tax bill. I've never once been annoyed at the idea of paying my fair share of taxes - I'm more annoyed knowing it doesn't go where it is needed most and that people earning 100 times what I do are probably finding ways to pay less than I do as a proportion of my income.
So how should the current government respond? They could make a gentle Eurodrift harder by seeking to nail Britain down in a different place, but have they got the time or authority to do that? And might that just annoy some voters even more if it's too blatant?
It's highly simplistic reasoning and analysis, like you've laid out above, that's got us into this mess.
Whoever is needed now cannot be another inexperienced Minister learning on the job. And why should Sunak who won the majority of MP votes give way to her anyway? Financial and economic expertise is needed now. Sunak is hardly ideal but he is a lot better than the alternatives.
Instead what do we have? They're still insisting there is no energy supply crisis. Or any need to even prepare people for conserving energy. That the doubling of bills vs last winter is problem solved. That any cash increase in wages / benefits is sufficient because its "more" regardless of the swamping of "more" by the real cost of living. Etc etc etc etc.
And worse still we have the way ministers deal with problems. With people. With institutions. Arrogance. Sneering. Belittling. These are not the people we need to work our way out of a wet paper bag, never mind the winter we face.
https://mattgoodwin.substack.com/p/this-isnt-working?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=858965&post_id=78168649&isFreemail=true&utm_medium=email
They're currently meddling with the dining arrangements, but the traditional plan is two sittings, one at 6.15pm and one at 8pm. The early sitting is more popular esp with the elderly passengers and those who like to go straight on to the shows. The later sitting attracts a more mixed crowd and feels more relaxed; if you get a good table discussion and drinks can go on without having to rush off.
Because of the almost daily clock changes - an hour back each day westbound and the reverse eastbound, I find that early sitting works best going west - your body feels like dinner is getting an hour later each day, whereas coming east you really want late sitting because the clocks go forward lunchtime.
They are trialling more flexible open dining with various rumours about how it will end up.
The objective here should be to maximise the wealth and strength of the nation. Income is overtaxed, capital is undertaxed, and to generate more long-term growth we need more investment in our human and social capital. Simple capital tax cuts and slashing of regulations don't do it anymore.
For balance, I would also tweak the funding model of the NHS and pensions to suit (where I think the State spends too much) but I accept there is little political appetite for that.
However, the west needs to support Ukraine as long as it can.... and then longer still.
Russia has messed up. Europe is pivoting away from Russia. It will take longer than this winter, but once it is over, it is likely that many European countries will pivot from Russian energy permanently, not least just because of Russia, but because of climate change. Russia has badly messed this one up.
The real danger here isn't Ukraine losing (that isn't very likely anymore), the real danger is Russia losing.
Russia will (I hope) lose. But there won't be any Ukrainian troops in Moscow, or anywhere else in Russia. Putin will be deposed, but the people in Russia will be told they were stabbed in the back by NATO. We would've won but for those meddling kids.
A stab in the back narrative is now almost certain in Russia.
I'm trying to think, but I'm sure no country has ever faced such a situation where a stab in the back myth develops after a major war they lost, where their territory wasn't occupied. I'm sure it'll all work out just fine and nothing major will happen twenty years later. /s
But there is no answer to this. I'm not prepared to see Ukraine lose, but Russia itself will never accept its own defeat. We're going to get away with this one. My daughter however, might not see 30.