Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Punters give Johnson a 7% chance of being CON general election leader – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,162
edited March 2023 in General
imagePunters give Johnson a 7% chance of being CON general election leader – politicalbetting.com

One of the consistent stories since Boris Johnson stepped down from the Conservative leadership last year has been that he wants to return. In particular he wants to get his own back on Sunak whom he lays a lot of blame for him being forced out.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,639
    Boris isn't coming back!
  • UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,541
    Third! Like Johnson in the next Tory leadership election, after Truss and AN Other
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,821

    Boris isn't coming back!

    Hasta la vista, baby!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092
    edited March 2023
    ydoethur said:

    I am starting to wonder if the SNP are trying to destroy themselves. They've found I think the only possible way to make the Murray Foote story worse.

    The party was asked a specific question about loss of members as a direct result of the GRR [gender recognition reform] Bill and Indyref2. The answer given was intended to make clear that these two reasons had not been the cause of significant numbers of members leaving.
    "The membership figure is normally produced annually and is not produced in response to individual media queries, including in this instance.
    "In retrospect, however, we should not have relied on an understanding of people's reasons for leaving as the basis of the information given to Murray and, thereafter, the media.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64993032

    To say 'we lied and we got caught but we misunderstood the question so technically we are just thick' isn't exactly a great look.

    The 'We're idiots' defence is always the last refuge for politicians.

    That response and justification is just woeful. And distinctly implausible. I think given the media guy has gone they'd have been better off just admitting it was a lie.

    Edit: I do love it though when someone quits but their people talk about how great they are or deny wrongdoing, leading to the obvious question of why they are leaving. Like when Cabinet Minister resign and are fulsome in praise of the PM, making it bemusing why they quit.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,921
    Given he has been re selected to fight Uxbridge he has to hold his marginal seat first.

    My tip if Sunak and Hunt lose the next general election is for Health Secretary Steve Barclay to be next Conservative leader and Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,564
    Milk those punters who think Boris has a chance of being PM again.

    Spoiler: he hasn't a cat in hell's chance.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092
    HYUFD said:

    Given he has been re selected to fight Uxbridge he has to hold his marginal seat first.

    Maybe he just wants the parachute payment you get for losing your seat. Or have they closed that loophole?
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,639
    I'm not a LAB fan but I won't be disappointed if SNP implode at the GE and lose say 30+ seats.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092

    Milk those punters who think Boris has a chance of being PM again.

    Spoiler: he hasn't a cat in hell's chance.

    Vast number of MPs want him to be PM, so the rest best be cautious and not give him an opportunity however slim the chance looks.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,564
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    I am starting to wonder if the SNP are trying to destroy themselves. They've found I think the only possible way to make the Murray Foote story worse.

    The party was asked a specific question about loss of members as a direct result of the GRR [gender recognition reform] Bill and Indyref2. The answer given was intended to make clear that these two reasons had not been the cause of significant numbers of members leaving.
    "The membership figure is normally produced annually and is not produced in response to individual media queries, including in this instance.
    "In retrospect, however, we should not have relied on an understanding of people's reasons for leaving as the basis of the information given to Murray and, thereafter, the media.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64993032

    To say 'we lied and we got caught but we misunderstood the question so technically we are just thick' isn't exactly a great look.

    The 'We're idiots' defence is always the last refuge for politicians.

    That response and justification is just woeful. And distinctly implausible. I think given the media guy has gone they'd have been better off just admitting it was a lie.

    Edit: I do love it though when someone quits but their people talk about how great they are or deny wrongdoing, leading to the obvious question of why they are leaving. Like when Cabinet Minister resign and are fulsome in praise of the PM, making it bemusing why they quit.
    "Mr Foote said he issued agreed party responses to the media which "created a serious impediment" to his role." = "I was told to lie - or I'd lose my job...."

    Says man who has lost his job but acquired the reputation of being a clown in the process.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,564
    kle4 said:

    Milk those punters who think Boris has a chance of being PM again.

    Spoiler: he hasn't a cat in hell's chance.

    Vast number of MPs want him to be PM, so the rest best be cautious and not give him an opportunity however slim the chance looks.
    "Vast number of MPs want him to be PM" - citation required. Oh, and MPs of other parties don't count.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,818

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    How much are they getting paid for taking it?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,564

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    Another Poundland job?
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,252

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    FFS. Did they learn nothing from the Lloyds HBOS merger?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092
    edited March 2023

    kle4 said:

    Milk those punters who think Boris has a chance of being PM again.

    Spoiler: he hasn't a cat in hell's chance.

    Vast number of MPs want him to be PM, so the rest best be cautious and not give him an opportunity however slim the chance looks.
    "Vast number of MPs want him to be PM" - citation required. Oh, and MPs of other parties don't count.
    At least 100 nominated him to be leader. That's a minimum of 25-30% of the MPs wanted him to be PM. I call that a vast amount, considering reappointing someone forced out for being incompetent and devoid of personal standards should be considered barmy.

    Hence why they need to be watchful of him at all times. If people wanted him to be PM then, they still would now.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,028
    HYUFD said:

    Given he has been re selected to fight Uxbridge he has to hold his marginal seat first.

    My tip if Sunak and Hunt lose the next general election is for Health Secretary Steve Barclay to be next Conservative leader and Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer

    If that’s all they have, that is depressing
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    DavidL said:

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    How much are they getting paid for taking it?
    Whatever it is, it's not likely to be enough.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,921

    kle4 said:

    Milk those punters who think Boris has a chance of being PM again.

    Spoiler: he hasn't a cat in hell's chance.

    Vast number of MPs want him to be PM, so the rest best be cautious and not give him an opportunity however slim the chance looks.
    "Vast number of MPs want him to be PM" - citation required. Oh, and MPs of other parties don't count.
    Boris had about 100 MPs backing him last year but Rishi had about 200 ie 2/3 of Tory MPs.

    I can't see that changing much, especially as the Conservatives voteshare is starting to rise again
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,921

    HYUFD said:

    Given he has been re selected to fight Uxbridge he has to hold his marginal seat first.

    My tip if Sunak and Hunt lose the next general election is for Health Secretary Steve Barclay to be next Conservative leader and Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer

    If that’s all they have, that is depressing
    Well Steve Barclay would be better than Ed Miliband, William Hague and Michael Foot who have been the last 3 Leaders of the Opposition the 2 main parties have picked after they lost power!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    FFS. Did they learn nothing from the Lloyds HBOS merger?
    What Talleyrand said.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,219
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    I am starting to wonder if the SNP are trying to destroy themselves. They've found I think the only possible way to make the Murray Foote story worse.

    The party was asked a specific question about loss of members as a direct result of the GRR [gender recognition reform] Bill and Indyref2. The answer given was intended to make clear that these two reasons had not been the cause of significant numbers of members leaving.
    "The membership figure is normally produced annually and is not produced in response to individual media queries, including in this instance.
    "In retrospect, however, we should not have relied on an understanding of people's reasons for leaving as the basis of the information given to Murray and, thereafter, the media.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64993032

    To say 'we lied and we got caught but we misunderstood the question so technically we are just thick' isn't exactly a great look.

    The 'We're idiots' defence is always the last refuge for politicians.

    That response and justification is just woeful. And distinctly implausible. I think given the media guy has gone they'd have been better off just admitting it was a lie.

    Edit: I do love it though when someone quits but their people talk about how great they are or deny wrongdoing, leading to the obvious question of why they are leaving. Like when Cabinet Minister resign and are fulsome in praise of the PM, making it bemusing why they quit.
    Talking of politicians using the "I'm an idiot" defence, how does BoJo survive the Partygate hearing next week?

    (I'm not saying he won't, he has more lives than a cat. But he seems to be on his way down, and he wasn't nice to people on his ascent.)
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    edited March 2023
    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092
    edited March 2023
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given he has been re selected to fight Uxbridge he has to hold his marginal seat first.

    My tip if Sunak and Hunt lose the next general election is for Health Secretary Steve Barclay to be next Conservative leader and Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer

    If that’s all they have, that is depressing
    Well Steve Barclay would be better than Ed Miliband, William Hague and Michael Foot who have been the last 3 Leaders of the Opposition the 2 main parties have picked after they lost power!
    He has the benefit of being so bland I literally had no recollection of him being a member of the current Cabinet, despite compiling summary tables of the background, age, constituency etc of each Member of the Cabinet.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,921
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Given he has been re selected to fight Uxbridge he has to hold his marginal seat first.

    My tip if Sunak and Hunt lose the next general election is for Health Secretary Steve Barclay to be next Conservative leader and Leader of the Opposition to PM Starmer

    If that’s all they have, that is depressing
    Well Steve Barclay would be better than Ed Miliband, William Hague and Michael Foot who have been the last 3 Leaders of the Opposition the 2 main parties have picked after they lost power!
    He has the benefit of being so bland I literally had no recollection of him being a member of the current Cabinet, despite compiling summary tables of the background, age, constituency etc of each Member of the Cabinet.
    Well Starmer is bland too
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    Last time we had a Labour government we had wars, bank failures, the Euro.

    And the wars were actually their fault.

    Covid I will give you as a bit unusual.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,252
    ydoethur said:

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    FFS. Did they learn nothing from the Lloyds HBOS merger?
    What Talleyrand said.
    So much that could be apposite

    But I guess you mean “learnt nothing / forgotten nothing”?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386

    ydoethur said:

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    FFS. Did they learn nothing from the Lloyds HBOS merger?
    What Talleyrand said.
    So much that could be apposite

    But I guess you mean “learnt nothing / forgotten nothing”?
    Yes.

    I wonder what he meant by that? :smile:
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,432
    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,821
    ydoethur said:

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    FFS. Did they learn nothing from the Lloyds HBOS merger?
    What Talleyrand said.
    "I am more afraid of an army of 100 sheep led by a lion than an army of 100 lions led by a sheep."
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    I am starting to wonder if the SNP are trying to destroy themselves. They've found I think the only possible way to make the Murray Foote story worse.

    The party was asked a specific question about loss of members as a direct result of the GRR [gender recognition reform] Bill and Indyref2. The answer given was intended to make clear that these two reasons had not been the cause of significant numbers of members leaving.
    "The membership figure is normally produced annually and is not produced in response to individual media queries, including in this instance.
    "In retrospect, however, we should not have relied on an understanding of people's reasons for leaving as the basis of the information given to Murray and, thereafter, the media.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-64993032

    To say 'we lied and we got caught but we misunderstood the question so technically we are just thick' isn't exactly a great look.

    The 'We're idiots' defence is always the last refuge for politicians.

    That response and justification is just woeful. And distinctly implausible. I think given the media guy has gone they'd have been better off just admitting it was a lie.

    Edit: I do love it though when someone quits but their people talk about how great they are or deny wrongdoing, leading to the obvious question of why they are leaving. Like when Cabinet Minister resign and are fulsome in praise of the PM, making it bemusing why they quit.
    Talking of politicians using the "I'm an idiot" defence, how does BoJo survive the Partygate hearing next week?

    (I'm not saying he won't, he has more lives than a cat. But he seems to be on his way down, and he wasn't nice to people on his ascent.)
    We know his angle, it's been trailed for more than 6 months, with some updates along the way:
    • The investigation is biased and unlawful
    • I was stitched up by Red Sue and did nothing wrong, even though I apologised for doing some things wrong
    • This is a gift to Labour
    • Everyone was at it (except me)
    I expect he will hammer home that he truly believed everything he said in the House, no matter how wrong he was, therefore he did not knowingly mislead, and it is unfair to hold him accountable for the lower threshold of still actually misleading, regardless of intent.

    If he can persuade of the latter maybe he can get a sanction below the trigger threshold. Only way Sunak might be able to hold off a massive rebellion.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,818

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    There’s not a British banking crisis, at least not yet. Which reflects quite well on the UK really. Somewhat unlike our administration in 2008 which proved to be shit.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    ydoethur said:

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    Last time we had a Labour government we had wars, bank failures, the Euro.

    And the wars were actually their fault.

    Covid I will give you as a bit unusual.
    Fair point - distance dulls the memories.

    So the Tories are not especially unlucky, just inept.
  • Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    As a matter of interest how would Labour have avoided brexit, covid, Ukraine and this banking issue ?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 38,811

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    My wife is transferring all of her money out of UBS on Monday if this is forced through.
  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092

    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    Why would Boris pursue a different direction anyway? Truss had plans which were a radical departure economically from Boris, despite running as the loyalist, and Sunak has a Cabinet stuffed with Boris appointees.
  • Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    It will be after Wednesday
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,921
    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    As a matter of interest how would Labour have avoided brexit, covid, Ukraine and this banking issue ?
    That's my point, the Tories have been unlucky. (Brexit excluded - Labour would have avoided that by just not having a referendum.)
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    MaxPB said:

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    My wife is transferring all of her money out of UBS on Monday if this is forced through.
    In protest, or for fear of losing it?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405
    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    Someone doesn’t know what ‘decimated’ means. Hint, it’s not 100% losses.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    HYUFD said:

    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!

    We gave up on it years ago tbh.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092
    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
  • ReedReed Posts: 152

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    Its like 2008 all over again. Rescue deals every weekend.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    Someone doesn’t know what ‘decimated’ means. Hint, it’s not 100% losses.
    I'd give a bit of a pass on that - it is often not used precisely anymore. If a youth today googles it they are told the first usage is to kill/remove/destroy 'a large proportion of' before the 'historical' definition.
  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,818
    MaxPB said:

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    My wife is transferring all of her money out of UBS on Monday if this is forced through.
    They might offer you some shares in Credit Suisse in lieu.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,564
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Milk those punters who think Boris has a chance of being PM again.

    Spoiler: he hasn't a cat in hell's chance.

    Vast number of MPs want him to be PM, so the rest best be cautious and not give him an opportunity however slim the chance looks.
    "Vast number of MPs want him to be PM" - citation required. Oh, and MPs of other parties don't count.
    At least 100 nominated him to be leader. That's a minimum of 25-30% of the MPs wanted him to be PM. I call that a vast amount, considering reappointing someone forced out for being incompetent and devoid of personal standards should be considered barmy.

    Hence why they need to be watchful of him at all times. If people wanted him to be PM then, they still would now.
    Come back in a week - and tell me how many of those 100 still want him to lead them into the election....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092
    What the? Lance Reddick has died?! Awesome actor.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-64959805
  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    DavidL said:

    MaxPB said:

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    My wife is transferring all of her money out of UBS on Monday if this is forced through.
    They might offer you some shares in Credit Suisse in lieu.
    Seems we are playing whack a mole with the banks here.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092
    edited March 2023

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Milk those punters who think Boris has a chance of being PM again.

    Spoiler: he hasn't a cat in hell's chance.

    Vast number of MPs want him to be PM, so the rest best be cautious and not give him an opportunity however slim the chance looks.
    "Vast number of MPs want him to be PM" - citation required. Oh, and MPs of other parties don't count.
    At least 100 nominated him to be leader. That's a minimum of 25-30% of the MPs wanted him to be PM. I call that a vast amount, considering reappointing someone forced out for being incompetent and devoid of personal standards should be considered barmy.

    Hence why they need to be watchful of him at all times. If people wanted him to be PM then, they still would now.
    Come back in a week - and tell me how many of those 100 still want him to lead them into the election....
    More than will admit it, I have no doubt. They know they cannot, but that doesn't change what the heart wants.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386
    edited March 2023

    ydoethur said:

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    Last time we had a Labour government we had wars, bank failures, the Euro.

    And the wars were actually their fault.

    Covid I will give you as a bit unusual.
    Fair point - distance dulls the memories.

    So the Tories are not especially unlucky, just inept.
    They are more inept than Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

    Which is rather a damning comment.

    Edit - TBF, Blair may have been a bad Prime Minister in many ways but he was perhaps the most formidable politician Labour has ever produced.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,630
    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    Why do you think the much trailed Russian offensive didn't materialise? Lack of troops?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    DavidL said:

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    There’s not a British banking crisis, at least not yet. Which reflects quite well on the UK really. Somewhat unlike our administration in 2008 which proved to be shit.
    Don't count your chickens, the GFC was not a 'British banking crisis' in August 2007.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007–2008_financial_crisis#Timeline
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386
    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much

    That's the most unconvincing lie since Dominic Cummings said he went to Durham for childcare reasons.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386

    HYUFD said:

    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!

    We gave up on it years ago tbh.
    I didn't even know it was still going!
  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    Reading in telegraph it seems HSBC could have quite big exposure to Credit Suisse.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,630
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    Last time we had a Labour government we had wars, bank failures, the Euro.

    And the wars were actually their fault.

    Covid I will give you as a bit unusual.
    Fair point - distance dulls the memories.

    So the Tories are not especially unlucky, just inept.
    They are more inept than Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

    Which is rather a damning comment.

    Edit - TBF, Blair may have been a bad Prime Minister in many ways but he was perhaps the most formidable politician Labour has ever produced.
    Was he produced by Labour or did he just use the Labour party as a vehicle?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386
    edited March 2023

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    Last time we had a Labour government we had wars, bank failures, the Euro.

    And the wars were actually their fault.

    Covid I will give you as a bit unusual.
    Fair point - distance dulls the memories.

    So the Tories are not especially unlucky, just inept.
    They are more inept than Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.

    Which is rather a damning comment.

    Edit - TBF, Blair may have been a bad Prime Minister in many ways but he was perhaps the most formidable politician Labour has ever produced.
    Was he produced by Labour or did he just use the Labour party as a vehicle?
    Produced by Labour.

    Again, despised the man but he was definitely a product of the party and its traditions.

    For good, in his desire to make public services work for everyone.

    For ill in many other ways. Especially the one where all your opponents are not merely honourable people who disagree with you but devils incarnate who deserve opprobrium, legal sanctions and to be ruthlessly personally attacked at every turn.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,818
    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    They are claiming casualty ratios of 6 or 7 to 1. Which is possible if they are just playing defence against very badly trained and equipped attackers when they have vastly superior kit.
    They are also exhausting Russian shell supplies which is taking the pressure off everywhere else.
    Meanwhile modern tanks and planes are coming. This war is not progressing to Russia’s advantage. Quite the opposite.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,011
    HYUFD said:

    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!

    They should have a show fronted by leading business people.

    It could be called Executive Relief.
  • ReedReed Posts: 152

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    Why do you think the much trailed Russian offensive didn't materialise? Lack of troops?

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training
    was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how
    to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.Others had abandoned their
    positions shortly after arriving at the
    front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones

    that is, have one way or anothesuggested the Bakhmut
    strategy is not the right move in their

    eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of
    ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    Why do you think the much trailed
    Russian offensive didn't materialise? Lack of troops?

    Could have been a Russian disinformation operation. Who knows.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386

    HYUFD said:

    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!

    They should have a show fronted by leading business people.

    It could be called Executive Relief.
    I misread that as Execution Relief. I was wondering whom you wanted to pay to have killed.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    HYUFD said:

    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!

    We stand on different sides of the political divide, but on this we agree.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,432

    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    It will be after Wednesday
    Ok dear.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,564
    Reed said:

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    Why do you think the much trailed Russian offensive didn't materialise? Lack of troops?

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training
    was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how
    to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.Others had abandoned their
    positions shortly after arriving at the
    front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones

    that is, have one way or anothesuggested the Bakhmut
    strategy is not the right move in their

    eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of
    ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    Why do you think the much trailed
    Russian offensive didn't materialise? Lack of troops?

    Could have been a Russian disinformation operation. Who knows.

    To what effect? Nothing that has hurt the Ukrainians.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,794
    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    Someone doesn’t know what ‘decimated’ means. Hint, it’s not 100% losses.
    I'd give a bit of a pass on that - it is often not used precisely anymore. If a youth today googles it they are told the first usage is to kill/remove/destroy 'a large proportion of' before the 'historical' definition.
    I remember a couple of years ago being so dumbfounded when a journalist (possibly inadvertently) used the word decimated correctly that I took a sceenshot:

  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    DavidL said:

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    They are claiming casualty ratios of 6 or 7 to 1. Which is possible if they are just playing defence against very badly trained and equipped attackers when they have vastly superior kit.
    They are also exhausting Russian shell supplies which is taking the pressure off everywhere else.
    Meanwhile modern tanks and planes are coming. This war is not progressing to Russia’s advantage. Quite the opposite.
    Well thats not what the us official is saying. I suppose he could be lying though there is no reason for the us to play up ukrainian casualties.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,818

    DavidL said:

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    There’s not a British banking crisis, at least not yet. Which reflects quite well on the UK really. Somewhat unlike our administration in 2008 which proved to be shit.
    Don't count your chickens, the GFC was not a 'British banking crisis' in August 2007.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007–2008_financial_crisis#Timeline
    The bank run on Northern Rock was in September 2007.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,630
    Reed said:

    Reading in telegraph it seems HSBC could have quite big exposure to Credit Suisse.

    Presumably the line is that once British pensioners feel their savings are at risk, they'll all demand the government withdraw its support for Ukraine and try to force them to negotiate with Putin.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,921

    HYUFD said:

    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!

    They should have a show fronted by leading business people.

    It could be called Executive Relief.
    They already have the Apprentice
  • ReedReed Posts: 152

    Reed said:

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    Why do you think the much trailed Russian offensive didn't materialise? Lack of troops?

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training
    was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how
    to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.Others had abandoned their
    positions shortly after arriving at the
    front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones

    that is, have one way or anothesuggested the Bakhmut
    strategy is not the right move in their

    eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of
    ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    Why do you think the much trailed
    Russian offensive didn't materialise? Lack of troops?

    Could have been a Russian disinformation operation. Who knows.

    To what effect? Nothing that has hurt the Ukrainians.
    No i think ukrainian troops were tied up in the north in anticipation of a potential russian push south.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,386

    HYUFD said:

    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!

    We stand on different sides of the political divide, but on this we agree.
    Like this post if you want to keep comic relief.

    I expect this post to have as many likes as the average post by a below average Russian troll.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,011
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!

    They should have a show fronted by leading business people.

    It could be called Executive Relief.
    I misread that as Execution Relief. I was wondering whom you wanted to pay to have killed.
    I was referring to knocking a few out, rather than knocking a few off.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
    He should have said annihilated, not decimated
    … it's extremely disconcerting to have learned that
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,874

    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    7% would sound about right then.

    As usual, it goes back to a single issue - would ANY other Conservative leader poll better than Sunak? There's zero evidence Boris Johnson would be any better - ditto Truss - so, as in 1997, the Party has to jog on with a leader slightly more popular than it but not popular enough to prevent a heavy defeat.

    So what?

    Why should the "Natural Party of Government" be the perpetual Party of Government?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,432
    kle4 said:

    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    Why would Boris pursue a different direction anyway? Truss had plans which were a radical departure economically from Boris, despite running as the loyalist, and Sunak has a Cabinet stuffed with Boris appointees.
    If this unlikely scenario happened, Boris would need to demonstrate contrast. I suspect that he would do this by reducing corporation tax back to 19%, and more popularly, by suspending VAT on domestic fuel. He wouldn't have time to do much more.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,011
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Comic Relief was dire on BBC1 tonight. They should just raise funds not to show it again next year and kill it off!

    They should have a show fronted by leading business people.

    It could be called Executive Relief.
    They already have the Apprentice
    We stumbled across that yesterday evening. We thought it was a comedy piss take, the candidates were so ridiculous.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,998
    Kle4 - You are right about the change in common usage for "decimated" -- but I think the original meaning is so interesting, and so precise, that I wouldn't use the word, as it commonly is used, even now.

    (Similarly, at least in the US, "ton" is often used to mean a large amount, and so you hear things like "We got a ton of snow in the mountains yesterday." Which always leaves me wondering just how many tons fell -- but not, so far, to the extent of trying to estimate the actual amount.)
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,630
    stodge said:

    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    7% would sound about right then.

    As usual, it goes back to a single issue - would ANY other Conservative leader poll better than Sunak? There's zero evidence Boris Johnson would be any better - ditto Truss - so, as in 1997, the Party has to jog on with a leader slightly more popular than it but not popular enough to prevent a heavy defeat.

    So what?

    Why should the "Natural Party of Government" be the perpetual Party of Government?
    I don't think a Boris comeback at some point in the future is impossible, but it depends on the dust having settled on his period in office and the consensus changing about his judgement on the big questions of the last decade.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,252
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    FFS. Did they learn nothing from the Lloyds HBOS merger?
    What Talleyrand said.
    So much that could be apposite

    But I guess you mean “learnt nothing / forgotten nothing”?
    Yes.

    I wonder what he meant by that? :smile:
    Mistrust your first impulses; they are nearly away good
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,377
    edited March 2023

    kle4 said:

    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    Why would Boris pursue a different direction anyway? Truss had plans which were a radical departure economically from Boris, despite running as the loyalist, and Sunak has a Cabinet stuffed with Boris appointees.
    If this unlikely scenario happened, Boris would need to demonstrate contrast. I suspect that he would do this by reducing corporation tax back to 19%, and more popularly, by suspending VAT on domestic fuel. He wouldn't have time to do much more.
    He could also ditch the top rate of income tax and appoint Kwarteng as Chancellor. That would be a real contrast with Sunak/Hunt.
  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    This on twitter

    Serious informations about bigger riots to come in France. Police is getting ready for much larger scale protests. This is what happens when elected officials work against people, when President don’t go trough referendum and uses executive decrees.

    https://twitter.com/Angelo4justice3/status/1636614234342817792?s=20
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,252
    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.

    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    It has completely blunted the Russian offensive that they were setting so much stock by
  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    stodge said:

    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    7% would sound about right then.

    As usual, it goes back to a single issue - would ANY other Conservative leader poll better than Sunak? There's zero evidence Boris Johnson would be any better - ditto Truss - so, as in 1997, the Party has to jog on with a leader slightly more popular than it but not popular enough to prevent a heavy defeat.

    So what?

    Why should the "Natural Party of Government" be the perpetual Party of Government?
    Maybe they could try Lee Anderson.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,630
    Reed said:

    Police is getting ready for much larger scale protests. This is what happens when elected officials work against people, when President don’t go trough referendum and uses executive decrees.

    https://www.google.com/search?q=Putin+signs+decree
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092
    Reed said:

    DavidL said:

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    They are claiming casualty ratios of 6 or 7 to 1. Which is possible if they are just playing defence against very badly trained and equipped attackers when they have vastly superior kit.
    They are also exhausting Russian shell supplies which is taking the pressure off everywhere else.
    Meanwhile modern tanks and planes are coming. This war is not progressing to Russia’s advantage. Quite the opposite.
    Well thats not what the us official is saying. I suppose he could be lying though there is no reason for the us to play up ukrainian casualties.
    I can think of plenty of reasons to - to make the Russians think it is undermining Ukrainian preparations elsewhere when it is not, for a start.

    I don't say that is what is going on - it's clearly very bloody for both sides, even if more so for the Russians - but neither side is exactly open with their casualties for any number of reasons.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,818
    Reed said:

    DavidL said:

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    They are claiming casualty ratios of 6 or 7 to 1. Which is possible if they are just playing defence against very badly trained and equipped attackers when they have vastly superior kit.
    They are also exhausting Russian shell supplies which is taking the pressure off everywhere else.
    Meanwhile modern tanks and planes are coming. This war is not progressing to Russia’s advantage. Quite the opposite.
    Well thats not what the us official is saying. I suppose he could be lying though there is no reason for the us to play up ukrainian casualties.
    I was talking about Bakhmut, not the war as a whole.
  • ReedReed Posts: 152

    kle4 said:

    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    Why would Boris pursue a different direction anyway? Truss had plans which were a radical departure economically from Boris, despite running as the loyalist, and Sunak has a Cabinet stuffed with Boris appointees.
    If this unlikely scenario happened, Boris would need to demonstrate contrast. I suspect that he would do this by reducing corporation tax back to 19%, and more popularly, by suspending VAT on domestic fuel. He wouldn't have time to do much more.
    He could also ditch the top rate of income tax and appoint Kwarteng as Chancellor. That would be a real contrast with Sunak/Hunt.
    Boris coming back would split the tories. Not a good bet.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,564
    Reed said:

    Reed said:

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.

    Others had abandoned their positions shortly after arriving at the front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones that is, have one way or another suggested the Bakhmut strategy is not the right move in their eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    Why do you think the much trailed Russian offensive didn't materialise? Lack of troops?

    Reed said:

    kle4 said:

    Reed said:

    Dont want to go on about the ukraine war too much but this is in the telegraph. Us officials estimate 120,000 casualties for ukrainian army and 200000 for Russians. So 320000 in total.

    Ukraine has demoted a top battlefield commander after he admitted his unit had been decimated in fighting around the city of Bakhmut.

    The battalion commander, known by his call sign Kupol, gave an unusually frank assessment of Ukrainian losses in an interview from the front lines earlier this week.

    He revealed that all of the original 500 soldiers in his unit had either been killed or injured, a rare acknowledgement from inside the Ukrainian ranks, where losses are kept strictly confidential.

    The Ukrainian high command is at pains to present a positive spin on the increasingly bloody defence of the east of the country. US officials have estimated that the Ukrainian army may have taken 120,000 casualties compared with 200,000 by the Russian army.

    Kupol told the Washington Post this week that the Ukrainian army training
    was often poor and that some of the rookie replacements didn’t know how
    to throw a hand grenade or fire a rifle.Others had abandoned their
    positions shortly after arriving at the
    front line, he said.

    It is interesting that some commentators, not Russian shill ones

    that is, have one way or anothesuggested the Bakhmut
    strategy is not the right move in their

    eyes, in terms of cost.
    Its tying up a lot of
    ukrainian troops which could be needed for a spring offensive.
    Why do you think the much trailed
    Russian offensive didn't materialise? Lack of troops?

    Could have been a Russian disinformation operation. Who knows.

    To what effect? Nothing that has hurt the Ukrainians.
    No i think ukrainian troops were tied up in the north in anticipation of a potential russian push south.
    They have been tied up for many months, on a "just in case" basis. They have had to keep Kyiv and the west to be a viable state, even if it means not having the manpower to move forward in the east.

    Yet.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,092
    Reed said:

    This on twitter

    Serious informations about bigger riots to come in France. Police is getting ready for much larger scale protests. This is what happens when elected officials work against people, when President don’t go trough referendum and uses executive decrees.

    https://twitter.com/Angelo4justice3/status/1636614234342817792?s=20

    They did just re-elect Macron convincingly when Pension reform was a big part of his efforts for years, what did they expect? And apparently French presidents have used that decree power quite a bit over the years.

    Sure, there'll be lots of protests, and I'm not fan of decree powers (I've not actually looked up the times the French President can use this one), but they've left that power on the books for a reason I guess.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,647
    DavidL said:

    Is this Tory government unlucky as well as inept? Brexit, Covid, Ukraine War, and now a banking crisis.

    Ok the first was self-inflicted but they do seem to be having a bad run of 'events'.

    I say: time to elect lucky Labour and avoid future catastrophes.

    There’s not a British banking crisis, at least not yet. Which reflects quite well on the UK really. Somewhat unlike our administration in 2008 which proved to be shit.
    Yeah, but if a couple of banks had messed up their balance sheets then pretty nailed on that others were doing the same. Be a little careful with the British Exceptionalism.
  • ReedReed Posts: 152
    Andrew Bridgens wife speaking from the heart here.

    grew up in a dictatorship, I came to England to live in a democracy, but what I am experiencing for quite sometime now in the UK is very close to China’s regime. What they are doing to my husband

    @ABridgen

    is appalling by any standard of Western democracy.

    https://twitter.com/NevenaBridgen/status/1636831977411100675?s=20
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,402
    Tony Blair is a genius.
    He took the UK's alpha party by the throat and kicked its arse up and down the Main Street in full public view.
    And then kicked it again just for fun.
    And again just because he could.
    If he'd joined the Tories he'd still have been PM.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    tlg86 said:

    UBS in talks to buy Credit Suisse.

    UBS shareholders should talk to Lloyds TSB shareholders.
    To be fair, Credit Suisse' private bank has a very desirable client list. The investment bank is the dysfunctional bit. UBS will do well if they can get their hands on the first while not being dragged down by the second.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,929
    Reed said:

    Andrew Bridgens wife speaking from the heart here.

    grew up in a dictatorship, I came to England to live in a democracy, but what I am experiencing for quite sometime now in the UK is very close to China’s regime. What they are doing to my husband

    @ABridgen

    is appalling by any standard of Western democracy.

    https://twitter.com/NevenaBridgen/status/1636831977411100675?s=20

    What are "they" doing to him?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,432

    kle4 said:

    Boris is, in my opinion, the only possible means of unseating the dismal decline manager and the assistant dismal decline manager before the next election, without it being called immediately - because Boris was elected, so he has more of a mandate than they do (rather than less). This is an extremely slim chance, and it gets slimmer as we near the election, but it isn't a zero chance.

    Why would Boris pursue a different direction anyway? Truss had plans which were a radical departure economically from Boris, despite running as the loyalist, and Sunak has a Cabinet stuffed with Boris appointees.
    If this unlikely scenario happened, Boris would need to demonstrate contrast. I suspect that he would do this by reducing corporation tax back to 19%, and more popularly, by suspending VAT on domestic fuel. He wouldn't have time to do much more.
    He could also ditch the top rate of income tax and appoint Kwarteng as Chancellor. That would be a real contrast with Sunak/Hunt.
    Anything aimed at growing the economy and benefitting the country would be a contrast from Sunak and Hunt. It's possibly the very first time we've been governed by two people who have absolutely zero shits to give about the national interest. We've had compromised PMs like Blair, poorly disguised europhiles like Cameron, and grifting jellies like Boris, but I really don't think we've ever had a PM for whom the entire gig is just a brief stop selling the UK out on the way to Malibu.
This discussion has been closed.