Scottish leader ratings from Ipsos – not good for Rishi – politicalbetting.com

System

Scottish leader ratings from Ipsos – not good for Rishi – politicalbetting.com

A Scotland-only poll is quite rare and we have a new one from Ipsos. The main leader ratings are featured in their charts above.

Read the full story here

JosiasJessop

"President Zelensky in first UK visit since invasion of Ukraine"

"No 10 has also announced that British training of Ukrainian forces will be expanded to cover fighter jet pilots and marines.

It's also expected the UK will announce fresh sanctions targeting Russia later.

Plans have been announced to train Ukrainian pilots to fly Nato-standard fighter jets in the future, a key request from Ukraine."

https://www.bbc.co.uk./news/uk-politics-64566248

Leon

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

MikeSmithson

Leon said:

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

I think that's a real possibility and makes a LAB majority a bit more likely

Leon

Salmond on absolutely blistering form here. Eviscerating Sturgeon, lamenting what she has done to the Indy cause

https://twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com/status/1622858585561522176?s=61&t=sWnhbBMXqU7BiNgCoitsoA

Whatever you think of Salmond, he was (and still is, when he chooses to be) quite the orator, and quite the operator

I say it again, I think the Indy movement is now going to split - much worse than the minor Nit/Alba split of before

HYUFD

60% Scottish unfavourable rating for Rishi is actually a big improvement on the 80% unfavourable rating Boris had with Scots.

Rishi also has a higher favourable rating than Boris did in Scotland, 18% to 16%

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/boris-johnsons-ratings-hit-record-low-scotland-snp-support-stays-strong

HYUFD

Sturgeon having higher unfavourable ratings than Sarwar and Starmer now good news for Labour and bad for the SNP

OnlyLivingBoy

MikeSmithson said:

Leon said:

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

I think that's a real possibility and makes a LAB majority a bit more likely

I think that every additional Scottish seat prospect for Labour also potentally adds English seats for them because it blunts the argument that a vote for Labour means a coalition with the SNP.

Fishing

JosiasJessop said:

"President Zelensky in first UK visit since invasion of Ukraine"

"No 10 has also announced that British training of Ukrainian forces will be expanded to cover fighter jet pilots and marines.

It's also expected the UK will announce fresh sanctions targeting Russia later.

I wonder why we're bothering, other than maybe a bit of virtue signalling. Sanctions have been a complete failure so far (excepting the ones targeting specific military or dual use components), as usual against a determined dictatorship. They may have actually done more harm than good, by providing an excuse for Putin to stop Russian energy exports. If throwing hundreds of lives away each day doesn't faze Putin or undermine his popularity much, closing McDonalds and preventing his people from buying western cars certainly won't.

Weapons, weapons and more weapons are what Ukraine needs.

MikeSmithson

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

JosiasJessop

Fishing said:

JosiasJessop said:

"President Zelensky in first UK visit since invasion of Ukraine"

"No 10 has also announced that British training of Ukrainian forces will be expanded to cover fighter jet pilots and marines.

It's also expected the UK will announce fresh sanctions targeting Russia later.

I wonder why we're bothering, other than maybe a bit of virtue signalling. Sanctions have been a complete failure so far (excepting the ones targeting specific military or dual use components), as usual against a determined dictatorship. They may have actually done more harm than good, by providing an excuse for Putin to stop Russian energy exports. If throwing hundreds of lives away each day doesn't faze Putin or undermine his popularity much, closing McDonalds and preventing his people from buying western cars certainly won't.

Weapons, weapons and more weapons are what Ukraine needs.

Sanctions are slow-burn items, and I'd disagree that they've been anything like a complete failure. They are really hurting Russia's ability to modernise their military (hence tanks coming online with very substandard optics), and are hurting the Russian economy.

If you argue that sanctions will not bring Putin down, then I'd agree. But they really hurt Russia's ability to fight - and that's what's important.

Besides, I'd argue there's a moral viewpoint as well: buying gas and oil from Russia when they're acting in the way they are is deeply immoral. We couldn't wean ourselves off it immediately, but it's good we're not paying them.

eek

Fishing said:

JosiasJessop said:

"President Zelensky in first UK visit since invasion of Ukraine"

"No 10 has also announced that British training of Ukrainian forces will be expanded to cover fighter jet pilots and marines.

It's also expected the UK will announce fresh sanctions targeting Russia later.

I wonder why we're bothering, other than maybe a bit of virtue signalling. Sanctions have been a complete failure so far (excepting the ones targeting specific military or dual use components), as usual against a determined dictatorship. They may have actually done more harm than good, by providing an excuse for Putin to stop Russian energy exports. If throwing hundreds of lives away each day doesn't faze Putin or undermine his popularity much, closing McDonalds and preventing his people from buying western cars certainly won't.

Weapons, weapons and more weapons are what Ukraine needs.

We can't give them weapons before we've trained them in how best to use them.

kinabalu

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MikeSmithson said:

Leon said:

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

I think that's a real possibility and makes a LAB majority a bit more likely

I think that every additional Scottish seat prospect for Labour also potentally adds English seats for them because it blunts the argument that a vote for Labour means a coalition with the SNP.

Another scare bites the dust. The Tories are going to have to run on their record, highlighting positive reasons to vote for them. Oh dear.

Carnyx

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MikeSmithson said:

Leon said:

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

I think that's a real possibility and makes a LAB majority a bit more likely

I think that every additional Scottish seat prospect for Labour also potentally adds English seats for them because it blunts the argument that a vote for Labour means a coalition with the SNP.

Doesn't work for one election, surely? It has to be seen to happen first.

Wulfrun_Phil

Leaving aside the leader ratings that Mike has highlighted, which effectively show Sturgeon and Starmer all but tied in net terms, the rest of the IPSOS findings are also worth a look.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2023-02/Charts_Leaders_SG_performance_GRA_Scottish Political Pulse_Feb23_pptx.pdf

Standouts for me are that:

- Scots back the UK government's blocking of the gender recognition bill by 50% for to 33% against. It wasn't clever of Sturgeon to pick this of all issues on which to have a constitutional battle with the UK government, nor for Sarwar to line up his troops to help vote through the bill.

- Although the SNP outscores Labour on those who have a favourable opinion of the party, the SNP is basically marmite whereas Labour isn't, so the SNP also outscores Labour on unfavourable opinions. Net favourable ratings for the parties are:
SNP 0% net
Lab 0% net
Conservative -44%
Green -8%
LD -18%

- Perceptions of Scottish Government performance are poor, from -16% to -31% on various issues.

The GE voting intention would have been interesting in the above context, it's a shame that IPSOS hasn't published it.

Carnyx

Leon said:

Salmond on absolutely blistering form here. Eviscerating Sturgeon, lamenting what she has done to the Indy cause

https://twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com/status/1622858585561522176?s=61&t=sWnhbBMXqU7BiNgCoitsoA

Whatever you think of Salmond, he was (and still is, when he chooses to be) quite the orator, and quite the operator

I say it again, I think the Indy movement is now going to split - much worse than the minor Nit/Alba split of before

You're making the mistake of equating SNP with Indy Movement. It's already been split for years. SNP vs Greens/some former ScSoc vs Labour for Indy (the latter very quiet though just now).

TheScreamingEagles

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Leaving aside the leader ratings that Mike has highlighted, which effectively show Sturgeon and Starmer all but tied in net terms, the rest of the IPSOS findings are also worth a look.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2023-02/Charts_Leaders_SG_performance_GRA_Scottish Political Pulse_Feb23_pptx.pdf

Standouts for me are that:

- Scots back the UK government's blocking of the gender recognition bill by 50% for to 33% against. It wasn't clever of Sturgeon to pick this of all issues on which to have a constitutional battle with the UK government, nor for Sarwar to line up his troops in support of the bill.

- Although the SNP outscores Labour on those who have a favourable opinion of the party, the SNP is basically marmite whereas Labour isn't, so the SNP also outscores Labour on unfavourable opinions. Net favourable ratings for the parties are:
SNP 0% net
Lab 0% net
Conservative -44%
Green -8%
LD -18%

- Perceptions of Scottish Government performance is poor, from -16% to -31% on various issues.

The GE voting intention would have been interesting in the above context, it's a shame that IPSOS hasn't published it.

But Starmer is a dud, the Sage of Sweden said so.

Carnyx

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

TheScreamingEagles

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Theuniondivvie

Leon said:

Salmond on absolutely blistering form here. Eviscerating Sturgeon, lamenting what she has done to the Indy cause

https://twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com/status/1622858585561522176?s=61&t=sWnhbBMXqU7BiNgCoitsoA

Whatever you think of Salmond, he was (and still is, when he chooses to be) quite the orator, and quite the operator

I say it again, I think the Indy movement is now going to split - much worse than the minor Nit/Alba split of before

Always good to hear a new insight on blokes in skirts behaving inappropriately around women.

Wulfrun_Phil

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

Starmer has taken a different stance to Sarwar on the bill, and was widely reported in Scotland as having done so.

eg.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-contradicts-scottish-labour-28958637

FrankBooth

One has to say that Sturgeon's ratings are extraordinary. However it seems the buck doesn't stop with her so that helps a lot.

Theuniondivvie

TheScreamingEagles said:

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons.
In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?

OnlyLivingBoy

Carnyx said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MikeSmithson said:

Leon said:

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

I think that's a real possibility and makes a LAB majority a bit more likely

I think that every additional Scottish seat prospect for Labour also potentally adds English seats for them because it blunts the argument that a vote for Labour means a coalition with the SNP.

Doesn't work for one election, surely? It has to be seen to happen first.

I think voters can read and understand polls. If we go into the election with Labour polling well in Scotland and the SNP likely to be on 30-40 seats not 56 then the scare story about Labour relying on the SNP to form a government is much diminished, both because Labour will be seen as having more seats and because the SNP will be expected to have fewer. And if the SNP fall back they're going to be far less able to demand an Indy Ref even if there were a hung parliament, and would likely be plunged into a nasty leadership election and thus a less effective force. The decline of the SNP, if sustained, is a huge gain for Labour that will be felt well beyond Scotland's borders in my view.

FrankBooth

Fishing said:

JosiasJessop said:

"President Zelensky in first UK visit since invasion of Ukraine"

"No 10 has also announced that British training of Ukrainian forces will be expanded to cover fighter jet pilots and marines.

It's also expected the UK will announce fresh sanctions targeting Russia later.

I wonder why we're bothering, other than maybe a bit of virtue signalling. Sanctions have been a complete failure so far (excepting the ones targeting specific military or dual use components), as usual against a determined dictatorship. They may have actually done more harm than good, by providing an excuse for Putin to stop Russian energy exports. If throwing hundreds of lives away each day doesn't faze Putin or undermine his popularity much, closing McDonalds and preventing his people from buying western cars certainly won't.

Weapons, weapons and more weapons are what Ukraine needs.

I don't think the sanctions have been a complete failure. Although I thought we were nothing like tough enough in 2014 those sanctions have clearly blunted Russia's military capability too. What they haven't been is effective enough to force Russia to stop fighting.

Fishing

JosiasJessop said:

Fishing said:

JosiasJessop said:

"President Zelensky in first UK visit since invasion of Ukraine"

"No 10 has also announced that British training of Ukrainian forces will be expanded to cover fighter jet pilots and marines.

It's also expected the UK will announce fresh sanctions targeting Russia later.

I wonder why we're bothering, other than maybe a bit of virtue signalling. Sanctions have been a complete failure so far (excepting the ones targeting specific military or dual use components), as usual against a determined dictatorship. They may have actually done more harm than good, by providing an excuse for Putin to stop Russian energy exports. If throwing hundreds of lives away each day doesn't faze Putin or undermine his popularity much, closing McDonalds and preventing his people from buying western cars certainly won't.

Weapons, weapons and more weapons are what Ukraine needs.

Sanctions are slow-burn items, and I'd disagree that they've been anything like a complete failure. They are really hurting Russia's ability to modernise their military (hence tanks coming online with very substandard optics), and are hurting the Russian economy.

Yes, that's why I excepted those on military and dual use components.

JosiasJessop said:

If you argue that sanctions will not bring Putin down, then I'd agree. But they really hurt Russia's ability to fight - and that's what's important.

The Economist made a useful distinction between three types of sanctions. Ones targeting military and dual use components, which I'd agree have been a partial success, though they seem still to be getting some of those components, or very good substitutes through Dubai or China or wherever. Sanctions against specific wealthy Russians, which have been a total and abject failure in stopping the war or bringing Putin down. And general economic sanctions, which may have hurt the Russian economy in some ways, but won't stop the war because Putin is a determined dictator who doesn't care. I think this is a valid distinction.

JosiasJessop said:

Besides, I'd argue there's a moral viewpoint as well: buying gas and oil from Russia when they're acting in the way they are is deeply immoral. We couldn't wean ourselves off it immediately, but it's good we're not paying them.

I don't see it as immoral in itself at all. We buy loads of crap from China and lots of other countries around the world with terrible governments because it benefits us as well as them. Anyway, if stopping buying energy would bring the end of the war closer, then sure, let's do it. But it isn't doing that, and the high energy prices are having perverse effects by undermining support for the war in some countries in Europe, as well as weakening our economies more than Russia's.

Beibheirli_C

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

Wulfrun_Phil

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons.
In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?

To repeat.

Starmer has taken a different stance to Sarwar on the bill, and was widely reported in Scotland as having done so.

eg.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-contradicts-scottish-labour-28958637

RochdalePioneers

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons.
In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?

I'm going to keep asking the obvious question: is the supposed mega issue of the GRR bill going to be the thing that drives committed independence voters to drop the SNP in favour of unionist parties?

Especially when the unionist parties also supported the GRR. Even the Tories were so divided that they had a free vote. And is "Sturgeon supported the GRR so I'll have to change my vote" the issue that turns people as opposed to the ones that actually affect them like jobs and prosperity and drugs and connectivity and education etc etc etc?

Sturgeon may well be done. So the question is which new leader wins their 5th election in a few years, not which of the GRR-supporting unionist parties picks up their votes. And yes I am discounting Alba because Salmond couldn't even pick up votes in his own village.

Theuniondivvie

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons.
In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?

To repeat.

Starmer has taken a different stance to Sarwar on the bill, and was widely reported in Scotland as having done so.

eg.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-contradicts-scottish-labour-28958637

But I’m sure I’d heard that SLab was an entirely autonomous wing of the Labour Party led by Anas Sarwar. Will they be campaigning separately in Scotland?

JosiasJessop

Fishing said:

(Snip)
I don't see it as immoral in itself at all. We buy loads of crap from China and lots of other countries around the world with terrible governments because it benefits us as well as them. Anyway, if stopping buying energy would bring the end of the war closer, then sure, let's do it. But it isn't doing that, and the high energy prices are having perverse effects by undermining support for the war in some countries in Europe, as well as weakening our economies more than Russia's.

It would be lunacy to give Russia billions of dollars a week for oil and gas, at the same time we're providing arms to Ukraine. As for support being undermined: some people just look for an excuse not to support the war. If it as not that, it would be something else.

We need as much pressure put on Russia as possible, and the sanctions are part of that pressure. True, they won't make Russia end the war: but nothing we do short of all-out war would. But they make it harder for Russia to fight the war, make it harder for the oligarchs to spend their money, and damages their economy.

Various people have made the point that Putin factored in sanctions in his decisions in 2014 and 2022 to invade Ukraine: he decided that they were part of doing business. The fact we've put together a package of sanctions orders of magnitude stronger than he expected is hurting him.

And it also makes it less likely for other countries to get such expansionist adventurism.

Dura_Ace

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

RochdalePioneers

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

Naah that was the other thread. This is how the massively unpopular PM and his heavily in decline in both Westminster and Holyrood voting is supposedly going to hoover up votes because the GRR Bill is the Only Issue people care about.

OnlyLivingBoy

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

101st Chairbourne, LOL very good.

FrankBooth

My own view is that Russia's economic prospects currently look very bleak. The elites must know that. The commodity price boost last year was temporary and the hydrocarbon sanctions are only just starting to bite.

They're selling oil to India at a massive discount leaving aside the logistics.
They can't sell their gas.
Lots of young educated people have left the country.
Their trying to fund a major war.
They've been cut off from much of the global economy.

Theuniondivvie

RochdalePioneers said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons.
In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?

I'm going to keep asking the obvious question: is the supposed mega issue of the GRR bill going to be the thing that drives committed independence voters to drop the SNP in favour of unionist parties?

Especially when the unionist parties also supported the GRR. Even the Tories were so divided that they had a free vote. And is "Sturgeon supported the GRR so I'll have to change my vote" the issue that turns people as opposed to the ones that actually affect them like jobs and prosperity and drugs and connectivity and education etc etc etc?

Sturgeon may well be done. So the question is which new leader wins their 5th election in a few years, not which of the GRR-supporting unionist parties picks up their votes. And yes I am discounting Alba because Salmond couldn't even pick up votes in his own village.

Murdo, not noted generally for his political prescience, thinks he knows. Not impossible, particularly since Brown seems to have been fairly unflappable over the trans issue.

JosiasJessop

A problem with looking at the effect of sanctions is that empires often fall plastically, not elastically. Hence everything seems fine and normal, as the stress within grows. Then suddenly it snaps. The sanctions may well be providing a lot of extra stresses within the administration.

(This is lesson #5 in the series "Material engineering for politics geeks")

Wulfrun_Phil

Theuniondivvie said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons.
In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?

To repeat.

Starmer has taken a different stance to Sarwar on the bill, and was widely reported in Scotland as having done so.

eg.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-contradicts-scottish-labour-28958637

But I’m sure I’d heard that SLab was an entirely autonomous wing of the Labour Party led by Anas Sarwar. Will they be campaigning separately in Scotland?

And I'm sure I'd previously heard the SNP claiming the opposite. Although now that it suits you, you're trying to change your tune.

Your point is irrelevant though, as you know. Labour will be fighting the next UK general election on a UK wide manifesto. And the decision on whether to block an unpopular bill in which the aspiring Queen Nicola has exceeded her powers is down to the UK government.

turbotubbs

Theuniondivvie said:

Leon said:

Salmond on absolutely blistering form here. Eviscerating Sturgeon, lamenting what she has done to the Indy cause

https://twitter.com/andrewdoyle_com/status/1622858585561522176?s=61&t=sWnhbBMXqU7BiNgCoitsoA

Whatever you think of Salmond, he was (and still is, when he chooses to be) quite the orator, and quite the operator

I say it again, I think the Indy movement is now going to split - much worse than the minor Nit/Alba split of before

Always good to hear a new insight on blokes in skirts behaving inappropriately around women.

Which one is the bloke?

Nigelb

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.

Anyway, Rishi has found someone he can look straight in the eye (as opposed to chin or chest):
https://twitter.com/RishiSunak/status/1623272630143918080

JosiasJessop

FrankBooth said:

My own view is that Russia's economic prospects currently look very bleak. The elites must know that. The commodity price boost last year was temporary and the hydrocarbon sanctions are only just starting to bite.

They're selling oil to India at a massive discount leaving aside the logistics.
They can't sell their gas.
Lots of young educated people have left the country.
Their trying to fund a major war.
They've been cut off from much of the global economy.

A YouTuber showed the complexities of a deal that Russia did to provide Pakistan with oil. There's no pipeline, and no train route, so the oil is going via rail as far as it can, then being put in road tankers across Afghanistan.

MaxPB

NIESR seems to think we won't have a recession at all and growth of 0.2% for the year, I think it may be a bit higher than that, I'd estimate a final figure of between 0.6% and 0.9% but the underlying data will look awful and the "recovery" will be entirely consumer led.

Pulpstar

This is probably how Labour ends up with a majority, taking more seats than people expect in Scotland.

RochdalePioneers

Pulpstar said:

This is probably how Labour ends up with a majority, taking more seats than people expect in Scotland.

I can see them doing decently at the general election. Sadly I don't see any of the unionist parties doing anything significant in terms of damage at the next Holyrood election, albeit that's still a way off.

Wulfrun_Phil

RochdalePioneers said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

Naah that was the other thread. This is how the massively unpopular PM and his heavily in decline in both Westminster and Holyrood voting is supposedly going to hoover up votes because the GRR Bill is the Only Issue people care about.

No, its not. I think it's more about how Sturgeon's attempt to provoke a constitutional crisis with the UK government has gone off at half cock because, while she clearly thinks that her own view is always equivalent to the "will of the Scottish people", in this case the polling shows that it isn't.

As I stated earlier, the IPSOS polling is also interesting to me because of the negative opinions it also reveals of the Scottish Government's performance on a range of issues and the fact that the SNP's net favourability rating is now no greater than that of Labour amongst Scots.

algarkirk

Theuniondivvie said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons.
In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?

I'm going to keep asking the obvious question: is the supposed mega issue of the GRR bill going to be the thing that drives committed independence voters to drop the SNP in favour of unionist parties?

Especially when the unionist parties also supported the GRR. Even the Tories were so divided that they had a free vote. And is "Sturgeon supported the GRR so I'll have to change my vote" the issue that turns people as opposed to the ones that actually affect them like jobs and prosperity and drugs and connectivity and education etc etc etc?

Sturgeon may well be done. So the question is which new leader wins their 5th election in a few years, not which of the GRR-supporting unionist parties picks up their votes. And yes I am discounting Alba because Salmond couldn't even pick up votes in his own village.

Murdo, not noted generally for his political prescience, thinks he knows. Not impossible, particularly since Brown seems to have been fairly unflappable over the trans issue.

Cometh the hour, cometh the Kate Forbes due back sometime from maternity leave to save Scotland from all this sort of thing and stand up for the Wee Frees

kamski

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Carnyx said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

MikeSmithson said:

Leon said:

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

I think that's a real possibility and makes a LAB majority a bit more likely

I think that every additional Scottish seat prospect for Labour also potentally adds English seats for them because it blunts the argument that a vote for Labour means a coalition with the SNP.

Doesn't work for one election, surely? It has to be seen to happen first.

I think voters can read and understand polls. If we go into the election with Labour polling well in Scotland and the SNP likely to be on 30-40 seats not 56 then the scare story about Labour relying on the SNP to form a government is much diminished, both because Labour will be seen as having more seats and because the SNP will be expected to have fewer. And if the SNP fall back they're going to be far less able to demand an Indy Ref even if there were a hung parliament, and would likely be plunged into a nasty leadership election and thus a less effective force. The decline of the SNP, if sustained, is a huge gain for Labour that will be felt well beyond Scotland's borders in my view.

Depends on what the polls look like closer to the election, but if the polling still shows the Conservatives almost certain to lose their majority, then the best way to avoid a coalition of chaos will be to make sure Labour get an outright majority - by voting Labour. Not sure how many voters in England will be basing any such calculation on whether Scottish polls show the SNP losing seats in Scotland. For sure still a big advantage for Labour if they can make gains in Scotland though.

Stuartinromford

MaxPB said:

NIESR seems to think we won't have a recession at all and growth of 0.2% for the year, I think it may be a bit higher than that, I'd estimate a final figure of between 0.6% and 0.9% but the underlying data will look awful and the "recovery" will be entirely consumer led.

And it won't feel like good times either. For quite a few, it will be experienced as a recession on a personal or family level.

And whilst any growth is better than decline, it will require careful spinning by the government, or they risk sounding out of touch (which I hope they aren't) millionaires (which Sunak and Hunt both are. Not bad in itself, but tricky casting).

Phil

JosiasJessop said:

A problem with looking at the effect of sanctions is that empires often fall plastically, not elastically. Hence everything seems fine and normal, as the stress within grows. Then suddenly it snaps. The sanctions may well be providing a lot of extra stresses within the administration.

(This is lesson #5 in the series "Material engineering for politics geeks")

I think you’re going for brittle failure vs plastic or elastic deformation?

Plastic deformation is when your material moves under stress & doesn’t spring back afterwards - it’s permanently deformed. Elastic is when it springs back again when you take the stress away. Brittle failure is when the material breaks apart suddenly at a given stress level.

At least I think I have that right...

Cyclefree

Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.

At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.

CarlottaVance

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

About a “non issue” that “nobody cares about”?

Surely not!

TheScreamingEagles

Cyclefree said:

Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.

At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.

Time to make Boris Johnson His Majesty’s Most Excellent Ambassador Extraordinaire and Plenipotentiary to Ukraine.

OnlyLivingBoy

Cyclefree said:

Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.

At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.

Is the Ukrainian leader shorter than Sunak? He certainly looks like it in the picture of them in the Graun, or is this from the PM's official photographer, who seems to have been selected specifically for his skills in this area?

JosiasJessop

Phil said:

JosiasJessop said:

A problem with looking at the effect of sanctions is that empires often fall plastically, not elastically. Hence everything seems fine and normal, as the stress within grows. Then suddenly it snaps. The sanctions may well be providing a lot of extra stresses within the administration.

(This is lesson #5 in the series "Material engineering for politics geeks")

I think you’re going for brittle failure vs plastic or elastic deformation?

Plastic deformation is when your material moves under stress & doesn’t spring back afterwards - it’s permanently deformed. Elastic is when it springs back again when you take the stress away. Brittle failure is when the material breaks apart suddenly at a given stress level.

At least I think I have that right...

I think that's correct, but that wasn't what I was going for: in many forms of engineering, a plastic failure is as much a failure as a brittle failure:. If something is permanently deformed, it cannot perform its original purpose and is essentially broken. My point was that regimes can withstand ever increasing stresses, but then suddenly fail.

But yes, I should have used "fails" rather than "snaps"

Nigelb

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Cyclefree said:

Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.

At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.

Is the Ukrainian leader shorter than Sunak? He certainly looks like it in the picture of them in the Graun, or is this from the PM's official photographer, who seems to have been selected specifically for his skills in this area?

They are both pretty short.
Zelensky doesn't seem to care about it, though.

algarkirk

Returning to Galashiels for a moment and the person arrested. That person is at the moment:

BBC: A man
Guardian: A named man
Mail: A person with two names, one characteristically male, one female
Sun: A person with two names who identifies as a woman.

I am sure this is symbolic of something. No idea what.

FrankBooth

Sunak's problem in Scotland - is it that levelling up comes across as too English? The general consensus about the need to boost economic performance outside the south east of England ought to find favour in Scotland but the flagship programme for this often seems more about providing pork barrel for Tory MPs. Of which there aren't many in Scotland.

Wulfrun_Phil

JosiasJessop said:

A problem with looking at the effect of sanctions is that empires often fall plastically, not elastically. Hence everything seems fine and normal, as the stress within grows. Then suddenly it snaps. The sanctions may well be providing a lot of extra stresses within the administration.

(This is lesson #5 in the series "Material engineering for politics geeks")

I note a correction in the second edition. If an empire is plastic, it won't snap. It'll just deform into a state from which it can never elastically recover to its former self. Snapping requires it to be brittle.

Stuartinromford

Phil said:

JosiasJessop said:

A problem with looking at the effect of sanctions is that empires often fall plastically, not elastically. Hence everything seems fine and normal, as the stress within grows. Then suddenly it snaps. The sanctions may well be providing a lot of extra stresses within the administration.

(This is lesson #5 in the series "Material engineering for politics geeks")

I think you’re going for brittle failure vs plastic or elastic deformation?

Plastic deformation is when your material moves under stress & doesn’t spring back afterwards - it’s permanently deformed. Elastic is when it springs back again when you take the stress away. Brittle failure is when the material breaks apart suddenly at a given stress level.

At least I think I have that right...

Yeah. Elastic stretching isn't really about making things break, but if you prevent plastic deformation brittle failure tends to kick in quickly.

Most institutions behave plastically, like metals. They absorb lots of shocks by becoming dented. Eventually they weaken, but you need to throw a lot of rocks at them to make them break.

Boris was the interesting one, because he appeared not to dent for a long time- more like fibreglass panels. But the accumulation of tiny cracks meant that he ended up shattering rapidly under a fairly minor scandal.

Truss was like trying to use gingerbread as a structural material. Yes it's been written about and sounds fun, but not a good idea.

Driver

.

Wulfrun_Phil said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

Naah that was the other thread. This is how the massively unpopular PM and his heavily in decline in both Westminster and Holyrood voting is supposedly going to hoover up votes because the GRR Bill is the Only Issue people care about.

No, its not. I think it's more about how Sturgeon's attempt to provoke a constitutional crisis with the UK government has gone off at half cock because, while she clearly thinks that her own view is always equivalent to the "will of the Scottish people", in this case the polling shows that it isn't.

As I stated earlier, the IPSOS polling is also interesting to me because of the negative opinions it also reveals of the Scottish Government's performance on a range of issues and the fact that the SNP's net favourability rating is now no greater than that of Labour amongst Scots.

Have the trans rights organisations yet cottoned onto the fact that Sturgeon was using trans people as a pawn in that attempt?

CarlottaVance

MikeSmithson said:

Leon said:

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

I think that's a real possibility and makes a LAB majority a bit more likely

Especially since Sturgeon’s pitch has been so anti-Tory - “vote SNP to keep the Tories out of Downing St” doesn’t really work when the obvious way to “keep the Tories out of Downing St” is to VOTE LABOUR

Selebian

algarkirk said:

Returning to Galashiels for a moment and the person arrested. That person is at the moment:

BBC: A man
Guardian: A named man
Mail: A person with two names, one characteristically male, one female
Sun: A person with two names who identifies as a woman.

I am sure this is symbolic of something. No idea what.

Schrödinger's catch?

Theuniondivvie

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons.
In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?

To repeat.

Starmer has taken a different stance to Sarwar on the bill, and was widely reported in Scotland as having done so.

eg.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-contradicts-scottish-labour-28958637

But I’m sure I’d heard that SLab was an entirely autonomous wing of the Labour Party led by Anas Sarwar. Will they be campaigning separately in Scotland?

And I'm sure I'd previously heard the SNP claiming the opposite. Although now that it suits you, you're trying to change your tune.

Your point is irrelevant though, as you know. Labour will be fighting the next UK general election on a UK wide manifesto. And the decision on whether to block an unpopular bill in which the aspiring Queen Nicola has exceeded her powers is down to the UK government.

Ah, Labour (particularly the English varient) perma rage about the EssEnnPee stealing their fiefdom is one of the great fixtures of UK politics.

You haven't a clue what my tune is, but assuming it's that SLab is a powerless husk whose opinions are irrelevant to the larger Labour party, whose point is being made here do you think?

turbotubbs

Nigelb said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Cyclefree said:

Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.

At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.

Is the Ukrainian leader shorter than Sunak? He certainly looks like it in the picture of them in the Graun, or is this from the PM's official photographer, who seems to have been selected specifically for his skills in this area?

They are both pretty short.
Zelensky doesn't seem to care about it, though.

From my perfectly normal height (5'8"), both Sunak (5'7") and Zelensky (5'6") are in no way to be described a short!

DJ41a

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.

So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.

PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?

PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.

Peter_the_Punter

TheScreamingEagles said:

Cyclefree said:

Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.

At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.

Time to make Boris Johnson His Majesty’s Most Excellent Ambassador Extraordinaire and Plenipotentiary to Ukraine.

Let him lead the charge at Bakhmut. Nice bit of glory for him.

CarlottaVance

Presdident Zelensky of Ukraine arrives in London today, only his second overseas visit after Washington. This suggests that whatever the overall wisdom or foolishness of leaving the EU, it hasn't left Britain irrelevant in the world.

https://twitter.com/paul_lever/status/1623259360142020608

felix

CarlottaVance said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

About a “non issue” that “nobody cares about”?

Surely not!

Some of us are old enough to remember when similar things were said about the EU. that didn't end well either.

kinabalu

Pulpstar said:

This is probably how Labour ends up with a majority, taking more seats than people expect in Scotland.

Or merely makes the majority that bit bigger - big Lab win is my pretty firm view now. I'm in the hole due to laying Lab majority @ 5 back in ye olde worlde and how I plan to clamber out of it is buying size of majority (assuming the opening quotes are too cautious which I think they will be).

kjh

CarlottaVance said:

Presdident Zelensky of Ukraine arrives in London today, only his second overseas visit after Washington. This suggests that whatever the overall wisdom or foolishness of leaving the EU, it hasn't left Britain irrelevant in the world.

https://twitter.com/paul_lever/status/1623259360142020608

I don't think it suggests anything of the sort. I suggest it suggests he is visiting the UK over the EU because the UK has been more supportive.

If the Faroe islands had provided tanks and other equipment on the same scale he would be there.

boulay

CarlottaVance said:

Presdident Zelensky of Ukraine arrives in London today, only his second overseas visit after Washington. This suggests that whatever the overall wisdom or foolishness of leaving the EU, it hasn't left Britain irrelevant in the world.

https://twitter.com/paul_lever/status/1623259360142020608

Pedant alert, sorry, I think he went to Poland after the US so unless “overseas” is being used literally then it’s his third trip to another country.

BartholomewRoberts

FPT

NickPalmer said:

Nigelb said:

StillWaters said:

Nigelb said:

Pretty good SOTU from Biden.

Clear that “let us finish the job” is the message for the re-election

I don't disagree with Mike that Biden is probably too old. But I also think he'll run, and will be a far better President than anyone I can imagine the Republicans selecting to run in 2024.

Doddery or not, for now he still has it.
In a combative moment filled with GOP heckles, Pres. Biden got Republican lawmakers to agree not to cut Social Security and Medicare as part of the ongoing debt ceiling negotiations
https://mobile.twitter.com/nowthisnews/status/1623183393176403971

(Not that the Republicans will keep any such commitment.)

Awesome political skill there

Not really. Social security and medicare have nice names, but they're benefits for the boomers not the whole nation and they are an unaffordable drain on the federal budget that are decades overdue reforms. But the sad reality is that both parties there know they need to pander to baby boomers to get votes so nobody is going to touch social security and medicare despite the fact they actually should.

Just like here in the UK vast wealth transfers are constantly happening from those who are productive and working to those who are unproductive, retired and frequently already wealthy rentiers who are not taxed at the same rate as those working for a living.

But those frequently already wealthy rentiers vote, and the young don't, so both parties here and there pander to them.

Getting both parties to pander to the boomer vote takes no skill, I'd be more impressed if anyone was willing to stand up and say that this is wrong. I shan't be holding my breath though.

Nigelb

DJ41a said:

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.

So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony...

Quite possibly, yes.
https://ru.usembassy.gov/world-war-ii-allies-u-s-lend-lease-to-the-soviet-union-1941-1945/

And you'd barely have had any manufacturing at the start of the war, if you were to discount the plants built by US business.

RochdalePioneers

CarlottaVance said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

About a “non issue” that “nobody cares about”?

Surely not!

When the polls show voters abandoning the SNP for the Tories then you will have a point. Until then, it isn't impacting how people vote because they care about stuff in their lives, not some theoretical thing which doesn't.

I can see how Sturgeon goes. Though it won't be this issue, the party will be shocked to discover the financial questions they have been ignoring and will remove her. That is a world away from Scottish voters chosing to abandon their so far solid support for the SNP to vote for unionist parties who want to block the independence they are also supporting.

BartholomewRoberts

kjh said:

CarlottaVance said:

Presdident Zelensky of Ukraine arrives in London today, only his second overseas visit after Washington. This suggests that whatever the overall wisdom or foolishness of leaving the EU, it hasn't left Britain irrelevant in the world.

https://twitter.com/paul_lever/status/1623259360142020608

I don't think it suggests anything of the sort. I suggest it suggests he is visiting the UK over the EU because the UK has been more supportive.

Which shows that Britain is not irrelevant in the world.

Post-Brexit whether we are supportive or not, relevant or not, is due to our actions that we choose to take - and not because of or despite Brexit.

FrankBooth

DJ41a said:

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.

So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.

PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?

PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.

The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.

The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.

algarkirk

Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.

With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.

With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.

Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.

Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.

CarlottaVance

Not just the GRR Bill where Sturgeon is out of touch with voters:

A mere 8 per cent of Scots want a referendum on secession this year, according to the latest poll. 👇
How did the First Minister so spectacularly misjudge what the people want?

https://twitter.com/JohnFerry18/status/1623283235915501569

kjh

BartholomewRoberts said:

kjh said:

CarlottaVance said:

Presdident Zelensky of Ukraine arrives in London today, only his second overseas visit after Washington. This suggests that whatever the overall wisdom or foolishness of leaving the EU, it hasn't left Britain irrelevant in the world.

https://twitter.com/paul_lever/status/1623259360142020608

I don't think it suggests anything of the sort. I suggest it suggests he is visiting the UK over the EU because the UK has been more supportive.

Which shows that Britain is not irrelevant in the world.

Post-Brexit whether we are supportive or not, relevant or not, is due to our actions that we choose to take - and not because of or despite Brexit.

Agree.

turbotubbs

Nigelb said:

DJ41a said:

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.

So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony...

Quite possibly, yes.
https://ru.usembassy.gov/world-war-ii-allies-u-s-lend-lease-to-the-soviet-union-1941-1945/

And you'd barely have had any manufacturing at the start of the war, if you were to discount the plants built by US business.

To be clear the US sent vast amounts of help:

400,000 jeeps & trucks
14,000 airplanes
8,000 tractors
13,000 tanks
1.5 million blankets
15 million pairs of army boots
107,000 tons of cotton
2.7 million tons of petrol products
4.5 million tons of food

kinabalu

Driver said:

.

Wulfrun_Phil said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

Naah that was the other thread. This is how the massively unpopular PM and his heavily in decline in both Westminster and Holyrood voting is supposedly going to hoover up votes because the GRR Bill is the Only Issue people care about.

No, its not. I think it's more about how Sturgeon's attempt to provoke a constitutional crisis with the UK government has gone off at half cock because, while she clearly thinks that her own view is always equivalent to the "will of the Scottish people", in this case the polling shows that it isn't.

As I stated earlier, the IPSOS polling is also interesting to me because of the negative opinions it also reveals of the Scottish Government's performance on a range of issues and the fact that the SNP's net favourability rating is now no greater than that of Labour amongst Scots.

Have the trans rights organisations yet cottoned onto the fact that Sturgeon was using trans people as a pawn in that attempt?

Or perhaps she did the reform because it was a longstanding commitment and she believes in it. Given (i) it's essentially the same reform the UKG were looking at before THEY decided to use Trans as a wedge issue and (ii) it has almost zero populist appeal I'd say the case for this view is quite respectable.

Foxy

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

Actually her support looks resilient to me. Remarkably so considering the brickbats flying at her from all directions. Considering the many failures of her governments policies, and at best lacklustre performance, her popularity and that of the SNP holds up amazingly well.

DJ41a

CarlottaVance said:

Presdident Zelensky of Ukraine arrives in London today, only his second overseas visit after Washington. This suggests that whatever the overall wisdom or foolishness of leaving the EU, it hasn't left Britain irrelevant in the world.

https://twitter.com/paul_lever/status/1623259360142020608

Sure - London is where a lot of Ukraine-active oligarchs invest some of their money. Paul Lever, former chair of the JIC and head of the EU desk at the FCO, can be proud. There's much more filthy money in London than in Paris or Berlin.

The Ihor Kolomoisky fraud trial in London was adjourned last March for a year, because of the war. (Write-up in the Law Gazette.) It's all right for Kolomoisky, isn't it? Fuel the war by funding the Azov battalion and other paramilitaries for years beginning in 2014, get yourself indicted for fraud, and then use the escalation of the war in 2022 as a reason to have your trial postponed.

BartholomewRoberts

kinabalu said:

Driver said:

.

Wulfrun_Phil said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

Naah that was the other thread. This is how the massively unpopular PM and his heavily in decline in both Westminster and Holyrood voting is supposedly going to hoover up votes because the GRR Bill is the Only Issue people care about.

No, its not. I think it's more about how Sturgeon's attempt to provoke a constitutional crisis with the UK government has gone off at half cock because, while she clearly thinks that her own view is always equivalent to the "will of the Scottish people", in this case the polling shows that it isn't.

As I stated earlier, the IPSOS polling is also interesting to me because of the negative opinions it also reveals of the Scottish Government's performance on a range of issues and the fact that the SNP's net favourability rating is now no greater than that of Labour amongst Scots.

Have the trans rights organisations yet cottoned onto the fact that Sturgeon was using trans people as a pawn in that attempt?

Or perhaps she did the reform because it was a longstanding commitment and she believes in it. Given (i) it's essentially the same reform the UKG were looking at before THEY decided to use Trans as a wedge issue and (ii) it has almost zero populist appeal I'd say the case for this view is quite respectable.

Tsk, tsk, believing there should be safeguarding in place for women's rights is not a wedge issue.

Secondly it has massive populist appeal if the populace you're trying to attract is right-on individuals in Twitter, the Grauniad etc.

Nigelb

FrankBooth said:

DJ41a said:

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.

So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.

PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?

PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.

The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.

The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.

Without Lend Lease we'd have been in a desperate position, and the freeing of German resources for the Eastern Front could quite conceivably have changed the outcome.

I don't know that you can say 'quite likely', but it's certainly possible.

OnlyLivingBoy

turbotubbs said:

Nigelb said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Cyclefree said:

Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.

At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.

Is the Ukrainian leader shorter than Sunak? He certainly looks like it in the picture of them in the Graun, or is this from the PM's official photographer, who seems to have been selected specifically for his skills in this area?

They are both pretty short.
Zelensky doesn't seem to care about it, though.

From my perfectly normal height (5'8"), both Sunak (5'7") and Zelensky (5'6") are in no way to be described a short!

Average UK adult male height is 5'10" and 5'7" is one standard deviation below that, so certainly 5'7" could be described as short. Not that it matters.

CarlottaVance

algarkirk said:

Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.

With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.

With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.

Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.

Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.

That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?

Nigelb

turbotubbs said:

Nigelb said:

DJ41a said:

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.

So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony...

Quite possibly, yes.
https://ru.usembassy.gov/world-war-ii-allies-u-s-lend-lease-to-the-soviet-union-1941-1945/

And you'd barely have had any manufacturing at the start of the war, if you were to discount the plants built by US business.

To be clear the US sent vast amounts of help:

400,000 jeeps & trucks
14,000 airplanes
8,000 tractors
13,000 tanks
1.5 million blankets
15 million pairs of army boots
107,000 tons of cotton
2.7 million tons of petrol products
4.5 million tons of food

And well over twice as much in financial terms to the UK.

kinabalu

Nigelb said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Cyclefree said:

Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.

At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.

Is the Ukrainian leader shorter than Sunak? He certainly looks like it in the picture of them in the Graun, or is this from the PM's official photographer, who seems to have been selected specifically for his skills in this area?

They are both pretty short.
Zelensky doesn't seem to care about it, though.

Z is short but stocky - the Oates in Hall & Oates template. Rishi is just very very tiny, which is harder to get yourself positive about as a man, I think. Still, it's far from his most pressing concern. That would be the ERG, I think.

Nigelb

Republicans Turn Themselves into Props for Biden
In a polarized era, the president retains far more power to frame the debate.
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/08/republicans-props-biden-state-of-the-union-00081774

OnlyLivingBoy

DJ41a said:

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.

So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.

PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?

PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.

Not the driver's seat one would hope.

kinabalu

CarlottaVance said:

algarkirk said:

Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.

With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.

With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.

Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.

Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.

That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?

Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?

Theuniondivvie

algarkirk said:

Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.

With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.

With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.

Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.

Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.

When the GRA process in Scotland started in 2016 it was largely shadowing what England under May was doing. Surveys regularly showed support for gender self recognition at that point. Now, you can say that voters went through some magical process of self enlightenment or they were persuaded by the issue being weaponised by various parties, but there's no doubt public perceptions have changed since then.

Wales as embodied by Welsh Labour and Drakeford appear to be shadowing Scotland. No doubt the Tories & tabloids wil be going round with pitchforks and flaming torches trying to inflame the issue there but they may have left it a bit too late before their own immolation.

'Welsh Government to seek devolution of gender recognition laws amid Scotland battle'

https://inews.co.uk/news/wales-welsh-government-devolution-gender-recognition-laws-scotland-battle-2131989

malcolmg

Leon said:

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

LOL, I would be surprised if they could manage to take a dump.

Wulfrun_Phil said:

Leaving aside the leader ratings that Mike has highlighted, which effectively show Sturgeon and Starmer all but tied in net terms, the rest of the IPSOS findings are also worth a look.

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2023-02/Charts_Leaders_SG_performance_GRA_Scottish Political Pulse_Feb23_pptx.pdf

Standouts for me are that:

- Scots back the UK government's blocking of the gender recognition bill by 50% for to 33% against. It wasn't clever of Sturgeon to pick this of all issues on which to have a constitutional battle with the UK government, nor for Sarwar to line up his troops to help vote through the bill.

- Although the SNP outscores Labour on those who have a favourable opinion of the party, the SNP is basically marmite whereas Labour isn't, so the SNP also outscores Labour on unfavourable opinions. Net favourable ratings for the parties are:
SNP 0% net
Lab 0% net
Conservative -44%
Green -8%
LD -18%

- Perceptions of Scottish Government performance are poor, from -16% to -31% on various issues.

The GE voting intention would have been interesting in the above context, it's a shame that IPSOS hasn't published it.

People will hold their nose and vote SNP when it comes to it.

turbotubbs

Nigelb said:

FrankBooth said:

DJ41a said:

Nigelb said:

Dura_Ace said:

Beibheirli_C said:

Oh lordy - trains and trans day on PB...

Later peeps!

(Does not bother removing hat or coat)

The Beggar King is in a Ford Galaxy on the M11 so pb's 101st Chairborne will be getting excited over that providing a welcome change from the trans shit and HS2 minutiae very soon.

We - and Russia to, for that matter - are a nation that survived WWII only because of US aid, so it's a bit charmless to get sniffy about someone else in a comparable situation.

So the Russian nation would have ceased to exist during WW2 had it not been for US aid? What a loony.

PS Would it be gazetted somewhere if Johnson were to receive his US citizenship back, or is it only renunciations that get publicly noted?

PPS Some Ford Galaxies from the mid-noughties had front seats that could turn round and face the back. Now that's what I call a cool car.

The Soviet Union would quite likely have been defeated had it not been for US aid and the allies bombing campaign in Germany. Hard for you to admit I'm sure.

The UK would probably have survived but we'd have had to sue for peace and Nazi dominance over the whole European continent would have made our position perilous.

Without Lend Lease we'd have been in a desperate position, and the freeing of German resources for the Eastern Front could quite conceivably have changed the outcome.

I don't know that you can say 'quite likely', but it's certainly possible.

I recently read a German focused account of Barbarossa (Barbarossa Through German Eyes?). Interestingly it stopped before the final push to Moscow, as by this time it was clear that Barbarossa had failed. It argues that it could never have succeeded - the space was too big, the German Army for the most part marched east, unlike the Americans, British and Canadians who moved by truck), the German tanks were not superior to the T34 and so on.
If thats right, and its a pretty convincing case, the only way that Russia would have lost would have been if Stalin and the government fell, or fled and sued for peace (unlikely to be granted in a war of anihilation).
There is no question that the western allies spent Russian lives to win the war and bought those lives with lend lease material. We avoided huge death tools in the west by letting the Russians die by the million.

Theuniondivvie

kinabalu said:

CarlottaVance said:

algarkirk said:

Strange that Sturgeon - very able as she is - should stumble over a couple of things much less gifted people would avoid.

With GRR all you have to do to avoid trouble is to shadow what England and Wales is doing (don't ask, no idea), take any credit and blame any problems on Westminster. Standard stuff.

With GE as 'proxy referendum' you cannot win. If you poll 50%+ everyone else says tough, we never recognised this. If you don't poll 50%+ you have lost on your own terms, and your enemies as well as other parties will be quick to point it out.

Since the Brexit 52/48 vote, pressing for a referendum except when support for the change is so strong it's irresistible is a bit out of fashion.

Why is this gifted (though wrong) politician not doing gritty everyday campaigning to get support for independence up to 60-65%, from which position she could actually get what she says she wants? Since Brexit she is not exactly short of material to work with.

That’s the point Salmond was making on WATO yesterday - why pick a fight with Westminster over this, rather than, for example, something Europe related which could be tied in with the economy/cost of living?

Why are we ruling out that she wants to deliver a longstanding commitment that she also believes in?

Comes under an increasing reluctance to assume ANY good faith in the motives of one's opponents.

FrankBooth

kinabalu said:

Nigelb said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Cyclefree said:

Presumably Boris's recent visit to Ukraine was part of the set up for Zelemsky's visit to the UK.

At any event, glad he is here. Britain's help for Ukraine is something to be proud about.

Is the Ukrainian leader shorter than Sunak? He certainly looks like it in the picture of them in the Graun, or is this from the PM's official photographer, who seems to have been selected specifically for his skills in this area?

They are both pretty short.
Zelensky doesn't seem to care about it, though.

Z is short but stocky - the Oates in Hall & Oates template. Rishi is just very very tiny, which is harder to get yourself positive about as a man, I think. Still, it's far from his most pressing concern. That would be the ERG, I think.

What an enlightened age we don't live in.

CarlottaVance

Breaking: leading lawyer Aidan O'Neill KC has said the Scottish government may have to delay its bottle return scheme as it may be unlawfully creating a trade barrier within the U.K. single market.

Some may point out ScotGov had been forewarned of this risk by opposition MSPs..

https://twitter.com/deanmthomson/status/1623285775109431296

BartholomewRoberts

malcolmg said:

Leon said:

Labour could take 10-15 seats from the Nits in 2024

LOL, I would be surprised if they could manage to take a dump.

Well they've got Edinburgh South but I suppose its Glasgow that's the dump?

malcolmg

algarkirk said:

Theuniondivvie said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Carnyx said:

MikeSmithson said:

There is little doubt that Sturgeon has been badly damaged by the trans issue

But also Labour and the SLDs and the SGs, remember - though they have been less salient, obviously.

It’s like the ERM, Labour and the Lib Dems were all in favour but only the government took the hit when it all went wrong.

There are other examples.

Makes it tricky turning it into a campaigning issue though for anyone but the Cons.
In general Starmer has succeeded by not saying very much at all, can he carry on doing the ‘otoh this but otoh that’ waltz on the gender issue all the way to the GE?

I'm going to keep asking the obvious question: is the supposed mega issue of the GRR bill going to be the thing that drives committed independence voters to drop the SNP in favour of unionist parties?

Especially when the unionist parties also supported the GRR. Even the Tories were so divided that they had a free vote. And is "Sturgeon supported the GRR so I'll have to change my vote" the issue that turns people as opposed to the ones that actually affect them like jobs and prosperity and drugs and connectivity and education etc etc etc?

Sturgeon may well be done. So the question is which new leader wins their 5th election in a few years, not which of the GRR-supporting unionist parties picks up their votes. And yes I am discounting Alba because Salmond couldn't even pick up votes in his own village.

Murdo, not noted generally for his political prescience, thinks he knows. Not impossible, particularly since Brown seems to have been fairly unflappable over the trans issue.

Cometh the hour, cometh the Kate Forbes due back sometime from maternity leave to save Scotland from all this sort of thing and stand up for the Wee Frees

She will require a backbone when she comes out of hiding.

SandyRentool

Sturgeon is Marmite. Sunak and Ross are Marmite that someone has smeared all over your brand new living room carpet.