Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I think there was an old artillery piece that Ukraine literally took out of a museum, so if the Russians are determined to keep fighting, and can't find anyone to supply them with better equipment, then eventually they will doubtless press into service anything that can move and has more armour than a Toyota Landcruiser.
I would have thought that sourcing ammunition for it might be a bit problematic, though.
It's still in service around the world, so probably not.
Lot of T55s kicking around - I knew a chap who used to have some for sale. Everything from live and running to a "unique restoration project".
A question: I assume that it's so old it doesn't have the same diameter barrel as more recent kit. *If* that's the case, how much ammo is there knocking about for a T-55?
100mm - unless it's been upgraded. Think the Czechs put L7s in theirs - which is a really, really massive improvement.
The Soviet made about a zillion rounds to go with the oceans of T55s they built. Must be fun to try using ammo thats sat in a warehouse in Africa for a few decades, or something.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I partly agree with you, and we can’t know the tactical conditions sat here, but even in a sector with no Ukrainian tanks I wouldn’t want to command one of those things where there’s likely NLAW and Javelin. And I’d query T55 vs. even the Bradleys the US is sending.
I wouldn't want to be in any tank with an enemy that has any western or Russian anti-tank weapons nearby. Yes, modern tanks may offer you more protection, but it's not total protection.
And yes, I agree that the T-55 should be pants against any modern kit. But they might still be better than not having a tank.
Either it's a piss take, or pretty desperate.
The Russians have an awful lot more of more recent tank models in storage. Though how many they can easily reactivate is anyone's guess.
Another WAG: might these be best used as semi-buried gun emplacements as parts of defence lines?
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I think there was an old artillery piece that Ukraine literally took out of a museum, so if the Russians are determined to keep fighting, and can't find anyone to supply them with better equipment, then eventually they will doubtless press into service anything that can move and has more armour than a Toyota Landcruiser.
I would have thought that sourcing ammunition for it might be a bit problematic, though.
It's still in service around the world, so probably not.
Lot of T55s kicking around - I knew a chap who used to have some for sale. Everything from live and running to a "unique restoration project".
A question: I assume that it's so old it doesn't have the same diameter barrel as more recent kit. *If* that's the case, how much ammo is there knocking about for a T-55?
Given how many were built, and that they're still in service in a few places (totalling more than Russia still has), a fair amount.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I partly agree with you, and we can’t know the tactical conditions sat here, but even in a sector with no Ukrainian tanks I wouldn’t want to command one of those things where there’s likely NLAW and Javelin. And I’d query T55 vs. even the Bradleys the US is sending.
I wouldn't want to be in any tank with an enemy that has any western or Russian anti-tank weapons nearby. Yes, modern tanks may offer you more protection, but it's not total protection.
And yes, I agree that the T-55 should be pants against any modern kit. But they might still be better than not having a tank.
Either it's a piss take, or pretty desperate.
The Russians have an awful lot more of more recent tank models in storage. Though how many they can easily reactivate is anyone's guess.
"Storage" is often a euphamism in Russia for "left outdoors, uncovered, through several decades of Russian winters. Oh, and all the electrics of any value have been looted."
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
The numbers are entirely consistent. Don’t look at the net approval and you see why.
I still think Sunak should tell the rebels that they can choose to hold the Tory whip or vote against the Windsor agreement.
He needs to be ruthless with these bastards. They've poisoned the party and British politics for long enough.
I trust you never criticised Boris for doing the same thing for what he felt was the same reason?
He set the precedent and therefore changed the future rules of engagement. It is a further indication that the man is an idiot
False analogy, I'm afraid. In Boris's case, the rebels disqualified themselves by voting against the government on what was effectively a vote of confidence. Today's vote will not be that, so your analogy fails.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
How’s about a few Ukranian servicemen, with an NLAW or two? There’s still plenty of those around.
Apparently Russia produced over 50K T-54s between 1946 and 1981. How many of them can they make servicable? Most must have been in storage for 30+ years. I remember some articles showing that most Russian "storage" is actually just left to rust in the open.
Some key points: - Crew compartment fills with engine fumes - Auxiliary gas tank on top of the rear bumper can be shot at with machine guns and made to explode
The tank was obsolete already in the 1960s and the T-62 which we were already laughing about the Russians using was seen as a massive improvement. They are really scraping the barrel now.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I partly agree with you, and we can’t know the tactical conditions sat here, but even in a sector with no Ukrainian tanks I wouldn’t want to command one of those things where there’s likely NLAW and Javelin. And I’d query T55 vs. even the Bradleys the US is sending.
I wouldn't want to be in any tank with an enemy that has any western or Russian anti-tank weapons nearby. Yes, modern tanks may offer you more protection, but it's not total protection.
And yes, I agree that the T-55 should be pants against any modern kit. But they might still be better than not having a tank.
Either it's a piss take, or pretty desperate.
The Russians have an awful lot more of more recent tank models in storage. Though how many they can easily reactivate is anyone's guess.
I read an article that said it was easier for Russia to refurbish 50 T-62s and 100 T-72s in a unit of time than it was to refurbish 150 T-72s in the same period.
So pulling T-54s or T-55s out of storage isn't necessarily a sign that they've run out of T-72s that they can make operational.
I still think Sunak should tell the rebels that they can choose to hold the Tory whip or vote against the Windsor agreement.
He needs to be ruthless with these bastards. They've poisoned the party and British politics for long enough.
I trust you never criticised Boris for doing the same thing for what he felt was the same reason?
He set the precedent and therefore changed the future rules of engagement. It is a further indication that the man is an idiot
It’s a view. I’d prefer not to follow bad precedent and try to improve the tone and temper of the debate. Sunak has won this, he can be magnanimous in the way Boris never was.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I partly agree with you, and we can’t know the tactical conditions sat here, but even in a sector with no Ukrainian tanks I wouldn’t want to command one of those things where there’s likely NLAW and Javelin. And I’d query T55 vs. even the Bradleys the US is sending.
I wouldn't want to be in any tank with an enemy that has any western or Russian anti-tank weapons nearby. Yes, modern tanks may offer you more protection, but it's not total protection.
And yes, I agree that the T-55 should be pants against any modern kit. But they might still be better than not having a tank.
Either it's a piss take, or pretty desperate.
The Russians have an awful lot more of more recent tank models in storage. Though how many they can easily reactivate is anyone's guess.
Another WAG: might these be best used as semi-buried gun emplacements as parts of defence lines?
There was a chap who did an analysis of the tank stockpile in Russia, a while back. Using the reported build numbers and openly available satellite pictures of the storage facilities.
Apparently, much of he stockpile is stored in the open air, quite a bit is visibly junk. I think it was about 10-20% seemed to be stored indoors.
Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man.
In the age of GPS, commercial satellite imagery, and drone, when you can target a weapon to the foot, a tank that can't move is just a death trap waiting to happen.
I still think Sunak should tell the rebels that they can choose to hold the Tory whip or vote against the Windsor agreement.
He needs to be ruthless with these bastards. They've poisoned the party and British politics for long enough.
I trust you never criticised Boris for doing the same thing for what he felt was the same reason?
He set the precedent and therefore changed the future rules of engagement. It is a further indication that the man is an idiot
It’s a view. I’d prefer not to follow bad precedent and try to improve the tone and temper of the debate. Sunak has won this, he can be magnanimous in the way Boris never was.
I tend to agree - though a suspension of the whip, rather than expulsion, might be in order.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I partly agree with you, and we can’t know the tactical conditions sat here, but even in a sector with no Ukrainian tanks I wouldn’t want to command one of those things where there’s likely NLAW and Javelin. And I’d query T55 vs. even the Bradleys the US is sending.
I wouldn't want to be in any tank with an enemy that has any western or Russian anti-tank weapons nearby. Yes, modern tanks may offer you more protection, but it's not total protection.
And yes, I agree that the T-55 should be pants against any modern kit. But they might still be better than not having a tank.
Either it's a piss take, or pretty desperate.
The Russians have an awful lot more of more recent tank models in storage. Though how many they can easily reactivate is anyone's guess.
The alleged Bakhmut tactic of sending in minimally trained conscripts to get the Ukrainians to reveal their positions to the quality troops may also work with minimally trained tank crews and expendable antiques.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I partly agree with you, and we can’t know the tactical conditions sat here, but even in a sector with no Ukrainian tanks I wouldn’t want to command one of those things where there’s likely NLAW and Javelin. And I’d query T55 vs. even the Bradleys the US is sending.
I wouldn't want to be in any tank with an enemy that has any western or Russian anti-tank weapons nearby. Yes, modern tanks may offer you more protection, but it's not total protection.
And yes, I agree that the T-55 should be pants against any modern kit. But they might still be better than not having a tank.
Either it's a piss take, or pretty desperate.
The Russians have an awful lot more of more recent tank models in storage. Though how many they can easily reactivate is anyone's guess.
I read an article that said it was easier for Russia to refurbish 50 T-62s and 100 T-72s in a unit of time than it was to refurbish 150 T-72s in the same period.
So pulling T-54s or T-55s out of storage isn't necessarily a sign that they've run out of T-72s that they can make operational.
The alleged Bakhmut tactic of sending in minimally trained conscripts to get the Ukrainians to reveal their positions to the quality troops may also work with minimally trained tank crews and expendable antiques.
A tactic copied entirely from the script of Zulu...
You might also ponder the difference between a Parliamentary motion allowing MPs to vote and a piece of critical government business.
Giving control of the Commons order paper - essentially what defines the Government in Parliament - to the leader of the opposition is very different from today's vote, true.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I still think Sunak should tell the rebels that they can choose to hold the Tory whip or vote against the Windsor agreement.
He needs to be ruthless with these bastards. They've poisoned the party and British politics for long enough.
I trust you never criticised Boris for doing the same thing for what he felt was the same reason?
He set the precedent and therefore changed the future rules of engagement. It is a further indication that the man is an idiot
False analogy, I'm afraid. In Boris's case, the rebels disqualified themselves by voting against the government on what was effectively a vote of confidence. Today's vote will not be that, so your analogy fails.
It was not a vote of confidence, so your attempt to discredit my direct comparison fails.
I know it is difficult to accept that someone you once adoringly admired is a pillock, but do give up on him. He is in the bunker and it won't be long before he shoots his Alsatian.
They’ll be running the Brexit Purity argument as soon as the next leadership election is upon us “oh things would be great if we had been more firm/Brexity/mad/all of the above. Sunak sold us out.”
We’re starting to see the reality of an OrBat of thousands of tanks (for any nation other than the USA). Past the top layer, they are paper tigers. All that being said, quantity does still have a quality all of its own.
Back in the day, they were very much a real threat - and the Soviets and their allies built over 100k of them. But unless heavily modified, they'd be useless against a modern IFV. Their thickest turret armour is only 200mm.
And not many of them left in Russia, according to Wikipedia. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-54/T-55_operators_and_variants ...As of 2013 there (were) 100 T-55s in reserve and less than 500 in storage, however those in storage may have been scrapped already...
Hopefully, the takeaway from Ukraine and their supporters, is that the Russian army is down to running on fumes, and it shouldn’t take a whole load more effort to put the invaders out of their misery.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I partly agree with you, and we can’t know the tactical conditions sat here, but even in a sector with no Ukrainian tanks I wouldn’t want to command one of those things where there’s likely NLAW and Javelin. And I’d query T55 vs. even the Bradleys the US is sending.
I wouldn't want to be in any tank with an enemy that has any western or Russian anti-tank weapons nearby. Yes, modern tanks may offer you more protection, but it's not total protection.
And yes, I agree that the T-55 should be pants against any modern kit. But they might still be better than not having a tank.
Either it's a piss take, or pretty desperate.
The Russians have an awful lot more of more recent tank models in storage. Though how many they can easily reactivate is anyone's guess.
Another WAG: might these be best used as semi-buried gun emplacements as parts of defence lines?
There was a chap who did an analysis of the tank stockpile in Russia, a while back. Using the reported build numbers and openly available satellite pictures of the storage facilities.
Apparently, much of he stockpile is stored in the open air, quite a bit is visibly junk. I think it was about 10-20% seemed to be stored indoors.
Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man.
In the age of GPS, commercial satellite imagery, and drone, when you can target a weapon to the foot, a tank that can't move is just a death trap waiting to happen.
Are you using that as an argument for the Russians *not* doing it?
They’ll be running the Brexit Purity argument as soon as the next leadership election is upon us “oh things would be great if we had been more firm/Brexity/mad/all of the above. Sunak sold us out.”
I fear wilderness beckons for the Tories.
My hope is that the a lot of the entryists from the Brexit Party have already left. Maybe it is time for people like me to rejoin.
I still think Sunak should tell the rebels that they can choose to hold the Tory whip or vote against the Windsor agreement.
He needs to be ruthless with these bastards. They've poisoned the party and British politics for long enough.
I trust you never criticised Boris for doing the same thing for what he felt was the same reason?
He set the precedent and therefore changed the future rules of engagement. It is a further indication that the man is an idiot
False analogy, I'm afraid. In Boris's case, the rebels disqualified themselves by voting against the government on what was effectively a vote of confidence. Today's vote will not be that, so your analogy fails.
It was not a vote of confidence, so your attempt to discredit my direct comparison fails.
[Lies and bullshit snipped]
Did you not read or not understand the word "effectively"?
See this comment for a further explanation of why your analogy fails.
You might also ponder the difference between a Parliamentary motion allowing MPs to vote and a piece of critical government business.
It’s quite long and I only skimmed it, but I can see nothing in there about Boris removing the whip from his rebels. I thought that was wrong and think Sunak doing it would be equally wrong, though Boris had the more extreme circumstances since Sunak will win the vote anyway.
As I said above, we should be trying to move on from Brexity anger. It’s done now and this was the last act. Sunak has a chance to move back towards the old normal and just ignore them in these circumstances.
Why doesn't Sunak simply withdraw the whip from those MPs voting against the Windsor Protocol? Gets rid of the loons and Boris in one go.
Withdrawing the whip makes them martyrs for a cause. Fuels their grievances etc. best to effectively ignore them and let them see that their voice means very little anymore.
I remember the disgrace of the whip being withdrawn from people like Ken Clarke and Nicholas Soames. Both of them sat bemused and a little shell-shocked on Newsnight. They didn't become a martyr for anyone because politics moved on.
The Tories really profoundly need to move on from the ERG. And from Johnsonism.
We’re starting to see the reality of an OrBat of thousands of tanks (for any nation other than the USA). Past the top layer, they are paper tigers. All that being said, quantity does still have a quality all of its own.
Back in the day, they were very much a real threat - and the Soviets and their allies built over 100k of them. But unless heavily modified, they'd be useless against a modern IFV. Their thickest turret armour is only 200mm.
And not many of them left in Russia, according to Wikipedia. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-54/T-55_operators_and_variants ...As of 2013 there (were) 100 T-55s in reserve and less than 500 in storage, however those in storage may have been scrapped already...
Hopefully, the takeaway from Ukraine and their supporters, is that the Russian army is down to running on fumes, and it shouldn’t take a whole load more effort to put the invaders out of their misery.
No, no.
It's a brilliant master plan where they are hiding all the "real" equipment for the Real Offensive. Which will happen Real Soon Now.
I think that is what Admiral General Fucker Carlson was selling the other day. But I don't watch Fox News, so I may be wrong.
They’ll be running the Brexit Purity argument as soon as the next leadership election is upon us “oh things would be great if we had been more firm/Brexity/mad/all of the above. Sunak sold us out.”
I fear wilderness beckons for the Tories.
My hope is that the a lot of the entryists from the Brexit Party have already left. Maybe it is time for people like me to rejoin.
I think it definitely is. Possibly a fringe benefit of this deal actually - send them all off to Reform and hope Starmer gets all the Corbynites to join the SWP.
Similarly, any political flexible youngster wanting to be a Cabinet Minister should now join the Tories in search of a seat and they will be in line for a job in 10-15 years. We’re at that point of the cycle.
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I partly agree with you, and we can’t know the tactical conditions sat here, but even in a sector with no Ukrainian tanks I wouldn’t want to command one of those things where there’s likely NLAW and Javelin. And I’d query T55 vs. even the Bradleys the US is sending.
I wouldn't want to be in any tank with an enemy that has any western or Russian anti-tank weapons nearby. Yes, modern tanks may offer you more protection, but it's not total protection.
And yes, I agree that the T-55 should be pants against any modern kit. But they might still be better than not having a tank.
Either it's a piss take, or pretty desperate.
The Russians have an awful lot more of more recent tank models in storage. Though how many they can easily reactivate is anyone's guess.
Another WAG: might these be best used as semi-buried gun emplacements as parts of defence lines?
There was a chap who did an analysis of the tank stockpile in Russia, a while back. Using the reported build numbers and openly available satellite pictures of the storage facilities.
Apparently, much of he stockpile is stored in the open air, quite a bit is visibly junk. I think it was about 10-20% seemed to be stored indoors.
Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man.
In the age of GPS, commercial satellite imagery, and drone, when you can target a weapon to the foot, a tank that can't move is just a death trap waiting to happen.
Are you using that as an argument for the Russians *not* doing it?
The old Soviet Union abandoned the "dug in old tank" thing on the Chinese border decades ago. They thought it was no longer worth doing - in the 1970s. Some of them had massive up-armoring of the turrets.
Why doesn't Sunak simply withdraw the whip from those MPs voting against the Windsor Protocol? Gets rid of the loons and Boris in one go.
Withdrawing the whip makes them martyrs for a cause. Fuels their grievances etc. best to effectively ignore them and let them see that their voice means very little anymore.
I remember the disgrace of the whip being withdrawn from people like Ken Clarke and Nicholas Soames. Both of them sat bemused and a little shell-shocked on Newsnight. They didn't become a martyr for anyone because politics moved on.
The Tories really profoundly need to move on from the ERG. And from Johnsonism.
The ERG can't 'move on' of course. They are staring into irrelevance.
Why doesn't Sunak simply withdraw the whip from those MPs voting against the Windsor Protocol? Gets rid of the loons and Boris in one go.
Withdrawing the whip makes them martyrs for a cause. Fuels their grievances etc. best to effectively ignore them and let them see that their voice means very little anymore.
I remember the disgrace of the whip being withdrawn from people like Ken Clarke and Nicholas Soames. Both of them sat bemused and a little shell-shocked on Newsnight. They didn't become a martyr for anyone because politics moved on.
The Tories really profoundly need to move on from the ERG. And from Johnsonism.
Erm, Clarke and definitely Soames became massive martyrs to the Remain cause….
Don’t you remember all the “they even pushed out Churchill’s grandson” (like who your grandfather is matters) rubbish? Rory Stewart still dines out on it.
You get diminishing returns I’ll grant you, but the Moggs of this work would, similarly, become martyrs. And he has a tv show on which to be one.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
The numbers are entirely consistent. Don’t look at the net approval and you see why.
No I can't see why. I know very little about polling but a reasonable amount about research. Or at least as far as it crosses the path of advertising.
If you asked which toothpaste a group preferred Colgate or Sensodine and they overwhelmingly preferred Sensodine I would then want to know how the research found Colgate to be the more popular toothpaste and why?
One thing I don't get is that the Russian troops in Transnistria cannot be resupplied or rotated. So how secure is the alleged massive arms dump there going to be?
LOL, they’ll be pulling T-34’s down from WWII memorials next.
How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go, up against the 20-year-old NATO kit that’s about to ship to the Ukranians?
I hare to enrage the usual suspects, but I fear not well.
But from the Russian's perspective: How do we think a 70-year-old T54 might go up against a few Ukrainian servicemen with only rifles and no anti-tank weaponry? Considerably better, I think.
The way I see it: good tanks are better than poor tanks. Poor tanks are better than no tanks.
I partly agree with you, and we can’t know the tactical conditions sat here, but even in a sector with no Ukrainian tanks I wouldn’t want to command one of those things where there’s likely NLAW and Javelin. And I’d query T55 vs. even the Bradleys the US is sending.
I wouldn't want to be in any tank with an enemy that has any western or Russian anti-tank weapons nearby. Yes, modern tanks may offer you more protection, but it's not total protection.
And yes, I agree that the T-55 should be pants against any modern kit. But they might still be better than not having a tank.
Either it's a piss take, or pretty desperate.
The Russians have an awful lot more of more recent tank models in storage. Though how many they can easily reactivate is anyone's guess.
Another WAG: might these be best used as semi-buried gun emplacements as parts of defence lines?
There was a chap who did an analysis of the tank stockpile in Russia, a while back. Using the reported build numbers and openly available satellite pictures of the storage facilities.
Apparently, much of he stockpile is stored in the open air, quite a bit is visibly junk. I think it was about 10-20% seemed to be stored indoors.
Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man.
In the age of GPS, commercial satellite imagery, and drone, when you can target a weapon to the foot, a tank that can't move is just a death trap waiting to happen.
Are you using that as an argument for the Russians *not* doing it?
The old Soviet Union abandoned the "dug in old tank" thing on the Chinese border decades ago. They thought it was no longer worth doing - in the 1970s. Some of them had massive up-armoring of the turrets.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
The numbers are entirely consistent. Don’t look at the net approval and you see why.
No I can't see why. I know very little about polling but a reasonable amount about research. Or at least as far as it crosses the path of advertising.
If you asked which toothpaste a group preferred Colgate or Sensodine and they overwhelmingly preferred Sensodine I would then want to know how the research found Colgate to be the more popular toothpaste and why?
Colgate - 35% like, 55% hate, 10% don't have an opinion. Sensodyne - 20% like, 15% hate, 55% don't have an opinion.
Net approval - Colgate -20, Sensodyne +5.
But Colgate will sell more based on the lead in "like", picking up some of the "don't have an opinion" group and most of that group splitting over other brands.
One thing I don't get is that the Russian troops in Transnistria cannot be resupplied or rotated. So how secure is the alleged massive arms dump there going to be?
Much can be understood about Russia's military planning and operations by reading the following short story by Ambrose Bierce
One thing I don't get is that the Russian troops in Transnistria cannot be resupplied or rotated. So how secure is the alleged massive arms dump there going to be?
Only the officers are from the RF mainland. The grunts are all from the PMR.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
The numbers are entirely consistent. Don’t look at the net approval and you see why.
No I can't see why. I know very little about polling but a reasonable amount about research. Or at least as far as it crosses the path of advertising.
If you asked which toothpaste a group preferred Colgate or Sensodine and they overwhelmingly preferred Sensodine I would then want to know how the research found Colgate to be the more popular toothpaste and why?
Colgate - 35% like, 55% hate, 10% don't have an opinion. Sensodyne - 20% like, 15% hate, 55% don't have an opinion.
Net approval - Colgate -20, Sensodyne +5.
But Colgate will sell more based on the lead in "like", picking up some of the "don't have an opinion" group and most of that group splitting over other brands.
Does that help?
Put better than I could.
But would also throw in that in the analogy, the approval rating is “best at cleaning teeth” but best PM adds in “can I afford it” and “do I need the extra stuff for sensitive teeth”. So you can have no strong option on approval, but come over on best PM.
Got to love this. 4 detailed questions about whether as Bunter claimed he gave advice. And each time the answer is simply "no".
It may be worth familiarising yourselves with his appearance in front of the liaison committee the day before his forced resignation as PM. He tried his usual bluster - state the lie loudly and often and they will believe you. Except that they very calmly kept pulling him back to the evidence. He had no response and seemed utterly bewildered.
I still think Sunak should tell the rebels that they can choose to hold the Tory whip or vote against the Windsor agreement.
He needs to be ruthless with these bastards. They've poisoned the party and British politics for long enough.
I trust you never criticised Boris for doing the same thing for what he felt was the same reason?
He set the precedent and therefore changed the future rules of engagement. It is a further indication that the man is an idiot
False analogy, I'm afraid. In Boris's case, the rebels disqualified themselves by voting against the government on what was effectively a vote of confidence. Today's vote will not be that, so your analogy fails.
It was not a vote of confidence, so your attempt to discredit my direct comparison fails.
[Lies and bullshit snipped]
Did you not read or not understand the word "effectively"?
See this comment for a further explanation of why your analogy fails.
I leave lies and bullshit to any idiot who still tries to defend Boris Johnson, but then again, I suspect you made that post "in good faith" because you are one of the few remaining Boris Johnson apologists and you have no idea where the boundary is between fact and fiction. I pity anyone who is still in awe of that idiot.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Its an interesting poll! If it is accurate then it raises all kinds of questions about why he is ahead - and what it means for the other polling showing all those seats reverting to red.
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
(As a complete ignoramus on tanks, is size itself important? Naively I'd have thought the combination of armour, ability to move quickly and negotiate rough terrain and weaponry determined capability. I can see that larger size probably helps with armour and bridging rough terrain.)
That's done with a bit of photo magic to make the difference look bigger.
But, British tank development took it's inspiration from the Conqueror (after the Centurion) - instead of going to lighter MBTs, as the Russians did, British doctrine was to build the heaviest general purpose tank possible.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
The numbers are entirely consistent. Don’t look at the net approval and you see why.
No I can't see why. I know very little about polling but a reasonable amount about research. Or at least as far as it crosses the path of advertising.
If you asked which toothpaste a group preferred Colgate or Sensodine and they overwhelmingly preferred Sensodine I would then want to know how the research found Colgate to be the more popular toothpaste and why?
Colgate - 35% like, 55% hate, 10% don't have an opinion. Sensodyne - 20% like, 15% hate, 55% don't have an opinion.
Net approval - Colgate -20, Sensodyne +5.
But Colgate will sell more based on the lead in "like", picking up some of the "don't have an opinion" group and most of that group splitting over other brands.
Does that help?
I was assuming they wanted a meaningful answer which can only be comparing like with like. 'Who would make a better airline pilot Charles Moore or Erling Haarland would tell you nothing of any interest
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
This particular poll, of course, has something for Lab and Tory alike - pick your metric and your guy wins
(As a complete ignoramus on tanks, is size itself important? Naively I'd have thought the combination of armour, ability to move quickly and negotiate rough terrain and weaponry determined capability. I can see that larger size probably helps with armour and bridging rough terrain.)
The Russian doctrine (after they dropped heavy tanks) was the smallest possible tank with as much firepower as possible, for low cost, high volume production. Protection, and especially internal explosion resistance took the back seat....
The British doctrine (after they dropped specific heavy tanks) was the heaviest practicable tank, lost of protection, lots of firepower. Think MBT with a lot of Tiger II/IS-3 vibes.
There have been a number of statements made to the effect that the heavy MBTs (Leopard II, Challenger II, M1A1) are too heavy for the road/bridge systems of Eastern Europe. We are about to find out.
Ignoring the fact that poll is a massive outlier, Trump is almost at 50% support already despite being an extremely known quantity. RDS on the other hand, is not that well known beyond "successful Republican from Florida". A lot of people are projecting what they want from a candidate onto him. He lacks charisma, and will lose either Republicans that want a strongman, partisans or the decorum crowd when he has to choose how to respond to being pummelled by Trump.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Its an interesting poll! If it is accurate then it raises all kinds of questions about why he is ahead - and what it means for the other polling showing all those seats reverting to red.
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
I agree largely with you but it will take time for tangible results and labour have a policy vacuum on the subject
I would also add Lineker gave the subject a huge profile and maybe not the one he wanted
Are we expecting opposition parties to vote in favour of the Windsor SI this afternoon? Presumably Sunak’s not actually in danger of losing the vote if there’s 35 rebels on his own bench?
I still think Sunak should tell the rebels that they can choose to hold the Tory whip or vote against the Windsor agreement.
He needs to be ruthless with these bastards. They've poisoned the party and British politics for long enough.
I trust you never criticised Boris for doing the same thing for what he felt was the same reason?
He set the precedent and therefore changed the future rules of engagement. It is a further indication that the man is an idiot
False analogy, I'm afraid. In Boris's case, the rebels disqualified themselves by voting against the government on what was effectively a vote of confidence. Today's vote will not be that, so your analogy fails.
It was not a vote of confidence, so your attempt to discredit my direct comparison fails.
[Lies and bullshit snipped]
Did you not read or not understand the word "effectively"?
See this comment for a further explanation of why your analogy fails.
I leave lies and bullshit to any idiot who still tries to defend Boris Johnson, but then again, I suspect you made that post "in good faith" because you are one of the few remaining Boris Johnson apologists and you have no idea where the boundary is between fact and fiction. I pity anyone who is still in awe of that idiot.
More lies and bullshit from you, I'm afraid.
Sure, I voted for him as PM twice - but only because the alternative was Jeremy Corbyn.
He should have gone as PM because of lockdown. He shouldn't come back to frontline politics and he won't come back to frontline politics - I said this yesterday when it was being discussed, you can check back in the threads if you weren't here yesterday.
But I can step back from the personalities and look at the difference between what happened in 2019 and what is happening today. You obviously can't because your judgement is clouded by hatred.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Its an interesting poll! If it is accurate then it raises all kinds of questions about why he is ahead - and what it means for the other polling showing all those seats reverting to red.
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
I agree largely with you but it will take time for tangible results and labour have a policy vacuum on the subject
I would also add Lineker gave the subject a huge profile and maybe not the one he wanted
I keep hearing that Labour have a policy vacuum. They do not. They have workable proposals which the Tories don't like for political reasons.
Saying "you have no policy" when they do, and your own "policy" is written in crayon is seriously laughable. And yet Braverman says it and you repeat it like it is the gospel truth.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
No, not at all. Most people in this country are much less partisan than you.
(As a complete ignoramus on tanks, is size itself important? Naively I'd have thought the combination of armour, ability to move quickly and negotiate rough terrain and weaponry determined capability. I can see that larger size probably helps with armour and bridging rough terrain.)
It's irrelevant as there has been very little tank v tank combat in the SMO. Both sides use them as either not very good artillery or to kill infantry. See that Kharkov video from last year where the Russian "Spetsnatz" try to surrender but an American shoots one in the head so they unsurrender then AFU bring up a T-62 to demolish the house they are holed up in. That's a more typical application. Everybody in the video also gets fucked by artillery and nobody can tell which side it's coming from. Also typical.
Are we expecting opposition parties to vote in favour of the Windsor SI this afternoon? Presumably Sunak’s not actually in danger of losing the vote if there’s 35 rebels on his own bench?
Are we expecting opposition parties to vote in favour of the Windsor SI this afternoon? Presumably Sunak’s not actually in danger of losing the vote if there’s 35 rebels on his own bench?
I can't see why Labour would vote against. I don't think I've heard any criticism of the deal from Labour. Or indeed any of the opposition parties - Lib Dems, SNP, Greens?
Edit: Even if they just abstain - which I don't think will happen - no way for the Government to get defeated.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Its an interesting poll! If it is accurate then it raises all kinds of questions about why he is ahead - and what it means for the other polling showing all those seats reverting to red.
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
I agree largely with you but it will take time for tangible results and labour have a policy vacuum on the subject
I would also add Lineker gave the subject a huge profile and maybe not the one he wanted
I keep hearing that Labour have a policy vacuum. They do not. They have workable proposals which the Tories don't like for political reasons.
Saying "you have no policy" when they do, and your own "policy" is written in crayon is seriously laughable. And yet Braverman says it and you repeat it like it is the gospel truth.
Apart from safe routes which would be overwhelmed they do not have any more than is already being done
(As a complete ignoramus on tanks, is size itself important? Naively I'd have thought the combination of armour, ability to move quickly and negotiate rough terrain and weaponry determined capability. I can see that larger size probably helps with armour and bridging rough terrain.)
The T55 (unless massively upgraded) is slow, has a pretty short range, very thin armour by modern standards, and a POS gun. And no modern electronic systems. It's basically crap.
Size isn't an absolute, but to field a decent sized gun, and substantial armour which has a reasonable chance of surviving a hit by modern weapons, tanks need to be pretty big.
Are we expecting opposition parties to vote in favour of the Windsor SI this afternoon? Presumably Sunak’s not actually in danger of losing the vote if there’s 35 rebels on his own bench?
Labour and Lib Dems are voting in favour, and probably the others.
There isn't a prospect of bringing down the Government on this and it would be seen as, and actually be, gross opportunism.
They will hope that enough Tories rebel that they can portray themselves as saving a (basically sensible) deal for a weak PM who cannot lead his own party.
UK politics feels a bit distant to me at the moment and all I want to remark on for now is that Heathrow is an absolute shithole compared to most international airports out east. And the potholes.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
The numbers are entirely consistent. Don’t look at the net approval and you see why.
No I can't see why. I know very little about polling but a reasonable amount about research. Or at least as far as it crosses the path of advertising.
If you asked which toothpaste a group preferred Colgate or Sensodine and they overwhelmingly preferred Sensodine I would then want to know how the research found Colgate to be the more popular toothpaste and why?
Colgate - 35% like, 55% hate, 10% don't have an opinion. Sensodyne - 20% like, 15% hate, 55% don't have an opinion.
Net approval - Colgate -20, Sensodyne +5.
But Colgate will sell more based on the lead in "like", picking up some of the "don't have an opinion" group and most of that group splitting over other brands.
Does that help?
I was assuming they wanted a meaningful answer which can only be comparing like with like. 'Who would make a better airline pilot Charles Moore or Erling Haarland would tell you nothing of any interest
They were comparing like with like in one question. But the approval ratings are a different question.
At the end of the day, in 2019 we were given two bad candidates. We still had to choose one of them.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Its an interesting poll! If it is accurate then it raises all kinds of questions about why he is ahead - and what it means for the other polling showing all those seats reverting to red.
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
I agree largely with you but it will take time for tangible results and labour have a policy vacuum on the subject
I would also add Lineker gave the subject a huge profile and maybe not the one he wanted
I keep hearing that Labour have a policy vacuum. They do not. They have workable proposals which the Tories don't like for political reasons.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Its an interesting poll! If it is accurate then it raises all kinds of questions about why he is ahead - and what it means for the other polling showing all those seats reverting to red.
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
I agree largely with you but it will take time for tangible results and labour have a policy vacuum on the subject
I would also add Lineker gave the subject a huge profile and maybe not the one he wanted
I keep hearing that Labour have a policy vacuum. They do not. They have workable proposals which the Tories don't like for political reasons.
Saying "you have no policy" when they do, and your own "policy" is written in crayon is seriously laughable. And yet Braverman says it and you repeat it like it is the gospel truth.
Apart from safe routes which would be overwhelmed they do not have any more than is already being done
Why would safe routes be overwhelmed? We take a mere fraction of the numbers taken by other nations and their safe routes are not overwhelmed.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Its an interesting poll! If it is accurate then it raises all kinds of questions about why he is ahead - and what it means for the other polling showing all those seats reverting to red.
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
I agree largely with you but it will take time for tangible results and labour have a policy vacuum on the subject
I would also add Lineker gave the subject a huge profile and maybe not the one he wanted
I keep hearing that Labour have a policy vacuum. They do not. They have workable proposals which the Tories don't like for political reasons.
Saying "you have no policy" when they do, and your own "policy" is written in crayon is seriously laughable. And yet Braverman says it and you repeat it like it is the gospel truth.
Apart from safe routes which would be overwhelmed they do not have any more than is already being done
Why would safe routes be overwhelmed? We take a mere fraction of the numbers taken by other nations and their safe routes are not overwhelmed.
Not according to Macron who in his summit with Sunak affirmed the problem of migration is an EU problem and not only in UK but of course in Italy and elsewhere
There have been a number of statements made to the effect that the heavy MBTs (Leopard II, Challenger II, M1A1) are too heavy for the road/bridge systems of Eastern Europe. We are about to find out.
Did we not think when we designed those tanks that Eastern Europe was a plausible place we might want to use them?
UK politics feels a bit distant to me at the moment and all I want to remark on for now is that Heathrow is an absolute shithole compared to most international airports out east. And the potholes.
The potholes.
What the hell happened to this country?
A cold and icy snap, when you were away, in a part of it not used to white stuff falling from the sky?
(As a complete ignoramus on tanks, is size itself important? Naively I'd have thought the combination of armour, ability to move quickly and negotiate rough terrain and weaponry determined capability. I can see that larger size probably helps with armour and bridging rough terrain.)
It's irrelevant as there has been very little tank v tank combat in the SMO. Both sides use them as either not very good artillery or to kill infantry. See that Kharkov video from last year where the Russian "Spetsnatz" try to surrender but an American shoots one in the head so they unsurrender then AFU bring up a T-62 to demolish the house they are holed up in. That's a more typical application. Everybody in the video also gets fucked by artillery and nobody can tell which side it's coming from. Also typical.
Typical just means most of the time, though. On the rare occasions when things move significant distances quickly, by accident or strategy, tanks appear still to be uniquely useful - but only if accompanied by mobile infantry.
Rishi Sunak seems to have continued to fall yet his party - depending on who you look with - is either standing still, or going up significantly.
Starmer's party seems to be standing still, with the support for the Tories seemingly coming from don't knows, as might be expected. What is curious is that the Greens seem to be surging in recent polls - who will take Labour vote I would assume - but I cannot see that being sustained at a GE.
I would suggest the current Labour lead is still in the double digits but narrowing. I would not see Sunak's "best PM" lead being retained.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Its an interesting poll! If it is accurate then it raises all kinds of questions about why he is ahead - and what it means for the other polling showing all those seats reverting to red.
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
I agree largely with you but it will take time for tangible results and labour have a policy vacuum on the subject
I would also add Lineker gave the subject a huge profile and maybe not the one he wanted
Fake news I fear. Labour don't have a policy vacuum on the subject. Yvette Cooper has set out a very clear 'small boats' policy. Whether you agree with it or not, or think it will work, is a different matter. But it's there.
Conservative polling now at 35% and only 10 points behind Labour.
I am very sceptical about that poll but it does seem as if the conservatives are now in the low thirties and Sunak overtook Starmer as best PM in the red wall seats in yesterday's poll
The circus around Johnson and his devotees is a distraction and is tedious in the extreme
Either the Red Wallers have less comprehension than is even imagined and don't understand the questions or more likely Redfield and Wilton have got their numbers confused
It's perfectly possible to think that Sir Keir is doing a good job as LOTO but would be a shit PM.
To ask both those questions is therefore absurd and demands of the respondents an imagination that makes the question meaningless.
You really mean you do not like a poll that shows Sunak ahead of Starmer in the red wall
Its an interesting poll! If it is accurate then it raises all kinds of questions about why he is ahead - and what it means for the other polling showing all those seats reverting to red.
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
I agree largely with you but it will take time for tangible results and labour have a policy vacuum on the subject
I would also add Lineker gave the subject a huge profile and maybe not the one he wanted
I keep hearing that Labour have a policy vacuum. They do not. They have workable proposals which the Tories don't like for political reasons.
Saying "you have no policy" when they do, and your own "policy" is written in crayon is seriously laughable. And yet Braverman says it and you repeat it like it is the gospel truth.
Apart from safe routes which would be overwhelmed they do not have any more than is already being done
Why would safe routes be overwhelmed? We take a mere fraction of the numbers taken by other nations and their safe routes are not overwhelmed.
We have an unusually high acceptance rate compared to other countries.
There have been a number of statements made to the effect that the heavy MBTs (Leopard II, Challenger II, M1A1) are too heavy for the road/bridge systems of Eastern Europe. We are about to find out.
Did we not think when we designed those tanks that Eastern Europe was a plausible place we might want to use them?
The plan was to fight WWIII in Germany.
Pure accident that the Americans found they'd built the perfect army for desert warfare.
UK politics feels a bit distant to me at the moment and all I want to remark on for now is that Heathrow is an absolute shithole compared to most international airports out east. And the potholes.
The potholes.
What the hell happened to this country?
Sounds interesting. Which countries did you visit?
Is food inflation a good thing wrt the obesity problem, or does it make it worse because people are more likely to eat unhealthy products?
Cheap food is carbohydrate heavy and often of low nutritional value.
Indeed I read a piece recently from a foodbank pleading for more varied donations. They have loads of cheap pasta and cereal, what they want is things that can put some more protein and vitamins in their boxes.
Comments
The Soviet made about a zillion rounds to go with the oceans of T55s they built. Must be fun to try using ammo thats sat in a warehouse in Africa for a few decades, or something.
See also under "scrap heap".
It is true that having a tank is better than no tank, but this the "Con" list here is quite interesting: https://www.quora.com/How-successful-is-the-T-54-and-T-55-tank
Some key points:
- Crew compartment fills with engine fumes
- Auxiliary gas tank on top of the rear bumper can be shot at with machine guns and made to explode
The tank was obsolete already in the 1960s and the T-62 which we were already laughing about the Russians using was seen as a massive improvement. They are really scraping the barrel now.
As an aside though, Ukraine is apparently using a few heavily upgraded ones given by Slovenia: https://twitter.com/UAWeapons/status/1601274338095042562?fbclid=IwAR3wtoXij5V4OcfeY8Va_FIleiFeOJ5mgJ2W-YtSk0PhZOR_HnX84bCODjo
So pulling T-54s or T-55s out of storage isn't necessarily a sign that they've run out of T-72s that they can make operational.
Apparently, much of he stockpile is stored in the open air, quite a bit is visibly junk. I think it was about 10-20% seemed to be stored indoors.
Fixed fortifications are a monument to the stupidity of man.
In the age of GPS, commercial satellite imagery, and drone, when you can target a weapon to the foot, a tank that can't move is just a death trap waiting to happen.
You might also ponder the difference between a Parliamentary motion allowing MPs to vote and a piece of critical government business.
The ERG are no longer the kingmakers.
Who are they trying to impress?
https://mobile.twitter.com/oryxspioenkop/status/1638474760215470080
Also.
Dad’s Army: List Of Russian Army Equipment Deployed In Ukraine Older Than Our Parents
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2023/03/dads-army-list-of-russian-army.html?m=1
He had a detailed knowledge of Trotskyite splinter groups of the Eighties, but shifted to the OMRLP some years ago.
I know it is difficult to accept that someone you once adoringly admired is a pillock, but do give up on him. He is in the bunker and it won't be long before he shoots his Alsatian.
They’ll be running the Brexit Purity argument as soon as the next leadership election is upon us “oh things would be great if we had been more firm/Brexity/mad/all of the above. Sunak sold us out.”
I fear wilderness beckons for the Tories.
Did you not read or not understand the word "effectively"?
See this comment for a further explanation of why your analogy fails.
As I said above, we should be trying to move on from Brexity anger. It’s done now and this was the last act. Sunak has a chance to move back towards the old normal and just ignore them in these circumstances.
The Tories really profoundly need to move on from the ERG. And from Johnsonism.
It's a brilliant master plan where they are hiding all the "real" equipment for the Real Offensive. Which will happen Real Soon Now.
I think that is what Admiral General Fucker Carlson was selling the other day. But I don't watch Fox News, so I may be wrong.
Similarly, any political flexible youngster wanting to be a Cabinet Minister should now join the Tories in search of a seat and they will be in line for a job in 10-15 years. We’re at that point of the cycle.
https://twitter.com/alanjzycinski/status/1638487730626740224?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
Edit: indeed, it seems as if the future might be coming very soon, at least in their view and Mr Johnson's.
Don’t you remember all the “they even pushed out Churchill’s grandson” (like who your grandfather is matters) rubbish? Rory Stewart still dines out on it.
You get diminishing returns I’ll grant you, but the Moggs of this work would, similarly, become martyrs. And he has a tv show on which to be one.
Cabinet secretary denies telling Boris Johnson that Covid rules were followed at all times in No 10 – UK politics live
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/mar/22/boris-johnson-partygate-inquiry-privileges-committee-brexit-rishi-sunak-uk-politics-latest-news
If you asked which toothpaste a group preferred Colgate or Sensodine and they overwhelmingly preferred Sensodine I would then want to know how the research found Colgate to be the more popular toothpaste and why?
Sensodyne - 20% like, 15% hate, 55% don't have an opinion.
Net approval - Colgate -20, Sensodyne +5.
But Colgate will sell more based on the lead in "like", picking up some of the "don't have an opinion" group and most of that group splitting over other brands.
Does that help?
Monmouth meanwhile has it Trump 46% DeSantis 37%
Pence 7% Haley 6% amongst Republican voters
https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_032123_2/
https://americanliterature.com/author/ambrose-bierce/short-story/jupiter-doke-brigadier-general
https://twitter.com/BritainElects/status/1638457233544716289
But would also throw in that in the analogy, the approval rating is “best at cleaning teeth” but best PM adds in “can I afford it” and “do I need the extra stuff for sensitive teeth”. So you can have no strong option on approval, but come over on best PM.
It may be worth familiarising yourselves with his appearance in front of the liaison committee the day before his forced resignation as PM. He tried his usual bluster - state the lie loudly and often and they will believe you. Except that they very calmly kept pulling him back to the evidence. He had no response and seemed utterly bewildered.
That's this afternoon that is.
⚡️Soon at the front a tank battle 🇺🇦Ukrainian tank Challenger against 🇷🇺Russian tank T-55 Your rates😁
https://twitter.com/front_ukrainian/status/1638498544981090304
Trump leads with evangelicals and those earning under $50k. DeSantis leads with non evangelicals and those earning over $50k a year
https://www.monmouth.edu/polling-institute/reports/monmouthpoll_us_032123_2/
Westminster voting intention:
LAB: 46% (-2)
CON: 31% (-1)
LDEM: 8% (-)
REF: 4% (+1)
GRN: 2% (-)
via @Survation, 17 - 20 Mar"
Sunak needs to take the ERG head on and enact the WF
Indeed if he is seen to be acting in the best interests of the country and NI he should benefit from it
Put into the context of these other polls it is at least likely that the poll isn't accurate. Which raises separate questions why that is. In either scenario, we should like it because it is interesting...
Hypothesis - the poll is accurate because Sunak has been given some credit for his push talking about Stopping the Boats. As so many red wallers voted Brexit/Tory to stop migration and earn more money I wouldn't be surprised if it was this.
The Tories problem is that the illegal Illegal Migration bill is written in crayon specifically to excite these voters. What it doesn't do is provide any practicable or workable solutions to actually deliver. The clock is already nearly running out on the pledge to deport anyone in 28 days from landing. When nothing is delivered, watch the same red wall voters trash talk Sunak just has quickly as they gave their approval in this poll...
(As a complete ignoramus on tanks, is size itself important? Naively I'd have thought the combination of armour, ability to move quickly and negotiate rough terrain and weaponry determined capability. I can see that larger size probably helps with armour and bridging rough terrain.)
But, British tank development took it's inspiration from the Conqueror (after the Centurion) - instead of going to lighter MBTs, as the Russians did, British doctrine was to build the heaviest general purpose tank possible.
The British doctrine (after they dropped specific heavy tanks) was the heaviest practicable tank, lost of protection, lots of firepower. Think MBT with a lot of Tiger II/IS-3 vibes.
There have been a number of statements made to the effect that the heavy MBTs (Leopard II, Challenger II, M1A1) are too heavy for the road/bridge systems of Eastern Europe. We are about to find out.
I would also add Lineker gave the subject a huge profile and maybe not the one he wanted
Sure, I voted for him as PM twice - but only because the alternative was Jeremy Corbyn.
He should have gone as PM because of lockdown. He shouldn't come back to frontline politics and he won't come back to frontline politics - I said this yesterday when it was being discussed, you can check back in the threads if you weren't here yesterday.
But I can step back from the personalities and look at the difference between what happened in 2019 and what is happening today. You obviously can't because your judgement is clouded by hatred.
Saying "you have no policy" when they do, and your own "policy" is written in crayon is seriously laughable. And yet Braverman says it and you repeat it like it is the gospel truth.
Edit: Even if they just abstain - which I don't think will happen - no way for the Government to get defeated.
It's basically crap.
Size isn't an absolute, but to field a decent sized gun, and substantial armour which has a reasonable chance of surviving a hit by modern weapons, tanks need to be pretty big.
There isn't a prospect of bringing down the Government on this and it would be seen as, and actually be, gross opportunism.
They will hope that enough Tories rebel that they can portray themselves as saving a (basically sensible) deal for a weak PM who cannot lead his own party.
I have a question for @Leon : are you the same Leon author of this:
https://www.audleytravel.com/australasia/region-guides/choosing-your-ideal-south-pacific-island
UK politics feels a bit distant to me at the moment and all I want to remark on for now is that Heathrow is an absolute shithole compared to most international airports out east. And the potholes.
The potholes.
What the hell happened to this country?
Predicable
At the end of the day, in 2019 we were given two bad candidates. We still had to choose one of them.
Jacob Rees-Worm being at the absolute bottom of the pile.
On the rare occasions when things move significant distances quickly, by accident or strategy, tanks appear still to be uniquely useful - but only if accompanied by mobile infantry.
Rishi Sunak seems to have continued to fall yet his party - depending on who you look with - is either standing still, or going up significantly.
Starmer's party seems to be standing still, with the support for the Tories seemingly coming from don't knows, as might be expected. What is curious is that the Greens seem to be surging in recent polls - who will take Labour vote I would assume - but I cannot see that being sustained at a GE.
I would suggest the current Labour lead is still in the double digits but narrowing. I would not see Sunak's "best PM" lead being retained.
Whether you agree with it or not, or think it will work, is a different matter. But it's there.
Pure accident that the Americans found they'd built the perfect army for desert warfare.
Indeed I read a piece recently from a foodbank pleading for more varied donations. They have loads of cheap pasta and cereal, what they want is things that can put some more protein and vitamins in their boxes.