Off topic, I assume that there still is such a thing as the Edinburgh Festival? Going off the TV, there is only the Fringe.
It seems to me that, at some point in the 90s, youth culture in the 70s became codified as mainstream culture at the broadcasters, and over time ossified. How else to explain the never-ending flow of stand-up comedians on TV doing everything from game shows to political commentary.
Hmm! Maybe rather longer than that? I remember going to a play by some Oxbridge group somewhere in the lower part of the High Street sometime around 1980 and seeing one R. Atkinson.
Wasn't he in one? I mean that I don't think it was yet the mainstream perspective on culture at the broadcasters. That was books, arts, theatre even if was just D'Oyly Carte. Nowadays I say that and it seems like it belongs at non-peak hours on Radio 4 or even 3. Feels like history programming has sustained itself a lot stronger.
I would quite like to read Theresa May’s book to understand her thinking and tactics in that critical period between the Brexit vote and the 2017 election.
You never get a decent understanding from the commentariat.
I’m still waiting for her masterplan to deliver us a soft Brexit….
Off topic, I assume that there still is such a thing as the Edinburgh Festival? Going off the TV, there is only the Fringe.
It seems to me that, at some point in the 90s, youth culture in the 70s became codified as mainstream culture at the broadcasters, and over time ossified. How else to explain the never-ending flow of stand-up comedians on TV doing everything from game shows to political commentary.
Hmm! Maybe rather longer than that? I remember going to a play by some Oxbridge group somewhere in the lower part of the High Street sometime around 1980 and seeing one R. Atkinson.
Conservatives will deffo do worse than UNS. In 2019, they benefited from anti-Jez tactical voting, and nobody (OK, hardly anybody) is going to go out of their way to vote against Keir Beige.
Interestingly, Theresa May blames Labour Brexiteers for jumping to Boris.
It’s historical fact. Labours political game playing killed off a softer Brexit. The only chance of a softer brexit was to vote for May’s deal - Labours political game playing in the HoC did not improve their electoral position AND led directly to Boris Johnson’s rock hard brexit.
Labours pointless game playing ultimately enabled Johnson’s rock hard Brexit. And that game playing was unnecessary, irresponsible, and cannot be defended by those who wish for a softer Brexit today.
Labour are particularly useless and Starmer in particular, utterly inept. Nonetheless your analysis is absurd. In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault. Labour own Brexit!
If I had been an MP in the Parliament of shame, I would have voted down May's deal. It was rubbish. It just happened that with the benefit of hindsight what came next was even worse.
Anyway glad you are back Rabbit.
May's deal was about the softest that could be expected given her red lines, which Labour MPs knew when a majority of them voted to invoke Article 50.
Fair enough, except May's red lines were absurd and tied her up in knots.
Brexit, as is, whether PB posters like it or not is the property of the Conservative Party.
Some odd figures in the header. The LibDems could have hoped to be on more than -13, while as many people have a definite opinion on Reform (mostly negative, though) as the LibDems. Since we almost never see anything about Reform or their leadership, where is all the strong feeling coming from?
It’ll be the polling companies hanging around Primrose Hill, again.
On topic. The Tories won't do worse than the polls. But tactical voting may disguise the extent of swing back.
We are in agreement, there will be tactical voting. But as psephologists and political bettors, it’s about anticipating exactly what and where. And why.
Our genial host has often pointed us to the largish lake of don’t knows out there, we need to keep an eye on it, if/when this starts to drain, is it breaking to the Tory total as much as it will need to?
The poll lead? Not for me, I prefer to keep an eye on what parties are polling, not the lead in the methodologies. Yes the lead shrinks, but if the most discernible movement in the polling is Lab to LibDem, and not Tory recovery, this is the scariest scenario bar none for the Tories in terms of tactical voting, the combined Lab+LibDem numbers in Blue Wall polling in particular.
There could be a gradual, almost unseen at first, move from Labour to LibDem over the next 12 months, though like have said so many times, I don’t think voters are at all honest with pollsters about tactical vote in all these polls we are seeing. An exit poll and PV so very different than the actual polls would not surprise me.
For example, if the polls in the last week of the General Election Campaign suggest a variant of Lab 43, Con 29, Lib Dem 12, reform 6 - a drop for Labour, rise for Con and Lib Dem from poll average today, I would not be shocked by a contrary exit poll of Lab 38 Con 28 LibDem 17, Ref 2. Not that Reform polling breaks to LibDem, the Refs sit on their hands disgusted with their own enablement of a parliament of incompetence and outright corruption, whilst LLG tactical votes always knew what to do in General Election, just never told pollsters about it. That would not surprise me one bit. In fact the resulting carnage would closely mirror real votes at the 2023 locals. A mirror of 2023 local election night is what I am expecting on General Election night, without expecting to ever see this in the polling.
I would quite like to read Theresa May’s book to understand her thinking and tactics in that critical period between the Brexit vote and the 2017 election.
You never get a decent understanding from the commentariat.
I’m still waiting for her masterplan to deliver us a soft Brexit….
She left all her planning to Nick Timothy. Simple misunderstanding. She thought a masturbator was somebody who good at baiting people.
People desperate to write Newcastle off this season, believing last season was some kind of fluke. I think their story is only just beginning…the atmosphere at St James’ will rattle opposition players all season long…what a place…
Conservatives will deffo do worse than UNS. In 2019, they benefited from anti-Jez tactical voting, and nobody (OK, hardly anybody) is going to go out of their way to vote against Keir Beige.
Interestingly, Theresa May blames Labour Brexiteers for jumping to Boris.
It’s historical fact. Labours political game playing killed off a softer Brexit. The only chance of a softer brexit was to vote for May’s deal - Labours political game playing in the HoC did not improve their electoral position AND led directly to Boris Johnson’s rock hard brexit.
Labours pointless game playing ultimately enabled Johnson’s rock hard Brexit. And that game playing was unnecessary, irresponsible, and cannot be defended by those who wish for a softer Brexit today.
Labour are particularly useless and Starmer in particular, utterly inept. Nonetheless your analysis is absurd. In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault. Labour own Brexit!
If I had been an MP in the Parliament of shame, I would have voted down May's deal. It was rubbish. It just happened that with the benefit of hindsight what came next was even worse.
Anyway glad you are back Rabbit.
May's deal was about the softest that could be expected given her red lines, which Labour MPs knew when a majority of them voted to invoke Article 50.
Fair enough, except May's red lines were absurd and tied her up in knots.
Brexit, as is, whether PB posters like it or not is the property of the Conservative Party.
There’s a picture out there of libdems in a Lobby and Labour sitting on their hands.
“Motion would not have passed anyway.”
Conservatives didn’t have a parliamentary majority. The Unionists could not vote for her deal. The whole situation was chaos and out of control if you don’t even give it a go you can’t know what would have happened.
Do the partisans of Labour attacking Sunak, or the Tory partisans attacking Starmer, really expect me to simply vote for either them because of the character assassinations of opponents.
As it happens, fearing a one-party state (or a civil war) that their most emphatic statements imply, I shall vote for neither.
Tactical voting remains the elephant in the political room. We know it has happened - there's plenty of evidence it continues to happen and there's only party which loses overall.
The problem for the LDs in 2024 is they son't have the strength they had in 1997 - I believe there are just 90 constituencies where the party was second to the Conservatives in 2019 and of course we can probably rule out about half as unreachable so the LD effort will be in about 50 seats next time - to win 30-35 of those (with the aid of tactical voting) will be a strong result.
Redfield & Wilton have identified significant numbers of Labour and LD supporters who will vote tactically to defeat an incumbent Conservative.
Take a seat like Chelmsford - the 202nd safest Conservative seat with a majority of 17,621 last time. The LDs run the council and strengthened their hold this year. With over 10,000 Labour votes to squeeze, could that be a surprise gain despite needing a 15.4% swing? I don't know but it's the kind of seat which could produce an upset if tactical voting is a potent enough force.
Do the partisans of Labour attacking Sunak, or the Tory partisans attacking Starmer, really expect me to simply vote for either them because of the character assassinations of opponents.
As it happens, fearing a one-party state (or a civil war) that their most emphatic statements imply, I shall vote for neither.
'Twas ever thus, and last time I checked we still have a multi-party state. But if you don't like the main parties, vote for another - that is your prerogative.
Off topic, I assume that there still is such a thing as the Edinburgh Festival? Going off the TV, there is only the Fringe.
It seems to me that, at some point in the 90s, youth culture in the 70s became codified as mainstream culture at the broadcasters, and over time ossified. How else to explain the never-ending flow of stand-up comedians on TV doing everything from game shows to political commentary.
Hmm! Maybe rather longer than that? I remember going to a play by some Oxbridge group somewhere in the lower part of the High Street sometime around 1980 and seeing one R. Atkinson.
“Flexcit” was the only Brexit that ever made sense. Move over time from EEA toward something else.
It had the “disadvantage” that it was a soft Brexit (in the old sense, ie it retained single market access), and that it didn’t have a clear timetable on it, thus open to criticism that was vulnerable to politically-driven stasis.
May’s Brexit was a kind of attempt to build a “hard” Flexcit, as she judged that immigration was the core reason behind Brexit and that any deal which retained FOM lacked legitimacy.
That was a terrible error, in my opinion, although you can understand the train of thought.
What’s done is done. Britain will spend the next generation fixing it.
Off topic, I assume that there still is such a thing as the Edinburgh Festival? Going off the TV, there is only the Fringe.
It seems to me that, at some point in the 90s, youth culture in the 70s became codified as mainstream culture at the broadcasters, and over time ossified. How else to explain the never-ending flow of stand-up comedians on TV doing everything from game shows to political commentary.
Hmm! Maybe rather longer than that? I remember going to a play by some Oxbridge group somewhere in the lower part of the High Street sometime around 1980 and seeing one R. Atkinson.
People desperate to write Newcastle off this season, believing last season was some kind of fluke. I think their story is only just beginning…the atmosphere at St James’ will rattle opposition players all season long…what a place…
Conservatives will deffo do worse than UNS. In 2019, they benefited from anti-Jez tactical voting, and nobody (OK, hardly anybody) is going to go out of their way to vote against Keir Beige.
Interestingly, Theresa May blames Labour Brexiteers for jumping to Boris.
It’s historical fact. Labours political game playing killed off a softer Brexit. The only chance of a softer brexit was to vote for May’s deal - Labours political game playing in the HoC did not improve their electoral position AND led directly to Boris Johnson’s rock hard brexit.
Labours pointless game playing ultimately enabled Johnson’s rock hard Brexit. And that game playing was unnecessary, irresponsible, and cannot be defended by those who wish for a softer Brexit today.
Labour are particularly useless and Starmer in particular, utterly inept. Nonetheless your analysis is absurd. In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault. Labour own Brexit!
If I had been an MP in the Parliament of shame, I would have voted down May's deal. It was rubbish. It just happened that with the benefit of hindsight what came next was even worse.
Anyway glad you are back Rabbit.
We've gained a Moon Rabbit and with Leon's banning lost a lunar tic.
Since when has Leon been banned? I thought he 'left' as a sort of joke?
Yeah, he left. I wonder if he’s going to return. Presumably the Saudi premier debating league is reaping dividends for him. 😃
Conservatives will deffo do worse than UNS. In 2019, they benefited from anti-Jez tactical voting, and nobody (OK, hardly anybody) is going to go out of their way to vote against Keir Beige.
Interestingly, Theresa May blames Labour Brexiteers for jumping to Boris.
It’s historical fact. Labours political game playing killed off a softer Brexit. The only chance of a softer brexit was to vote for May’s deal - Labours political game playing in the HoC did not improve their electoral position AND led directly to Boris Johnson’s rock hard brexit.
Labours pointless game playing ultimately enabled Johnson’s rock hard Brexit. And that game playing was unnecessary, irresponsible, and cannot be defended by those who wish for a softer Brexit today.
Labour are particularly useless and Starmer in particular, utterly inept. Nonetheless your analysis is absurd. In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault. Labour own Brexit!
If I had been an MP in the Parliament of shame, I would have voted down May's deal. It was rubbish. It just happened that with the benefit of hindsight what came next was even worse.
Anyway glad you are back Rabbit.
We've gained a Moon Rabbit and with Leon's banning lost a lunar tic.
Since when has Leon been banned? I thought he 'left' as a sort of joke?
Yeah, he left. I wonder if he’s going to return. Presumably the Saudi premier debating league is reaping dividends for him. 😃
We just wait for the next new account that makes a post with a random WORD in capital letters....
Conservatives will deffo do worse than UNS. In 2019, they benefited from anti-Jez tactical voting, and nobody (OK, hardly anybody) is going to go out of their way to vote against Keir Beige.
Interestingly, Theresa May blames Labour Brexiteers for jumping to Boris.
It’s historical fact. Labours political game playing killed off a softer Brexit. The only chance of a softer brexit was to vote for May’s deal - Labours political game playing in the HoC did not improve their electoral position AND led directly to Boris Johnson’s rock hard brexit.
Labours pointless game playing ultimately enabled Johnson’s rock hard Brexit. And that game playing was unnecessary, irresponsible, and cannot be defended by those who wish for a softer Brexit today.
Labour are particularly useless and Starmer in particular, utterly inept. Nonetheless your analysis is absurd. In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault. Labour own Brexit!
If I had been an MP in the Parliament of shame, I would have voted down May's deal. It was rubbish. It just happened that with the benefit of hindsight what came next was even worse.
Anyway glad you are back Rabbit.
May's deal was about the softest that could be expected given her red lines, which Labour MPs knew when a majority of them voted to invoke Article 50.
Fair enough, except May's red lines were absurd and tied her up in knots.
Brexit, as is, whether PB posters like it or not is the property of the Conservative Party.
There’s a picture out there of libdems in a Lobby and Labour sitting on their hands.
“Motion would not have passed anyway.”
Conservatives didn’t have a parliamentary majority. The Unionists could not vote for her deal. The whole situation was chaos and out of control if you don’t even give it a go you can’t know what would have happened.
I'd have sat on my hands in the faint hope of that second Referendum.
May's attempt to get her deal through was ludicrous. Putting exactly the same proposal through time and again was madness.
The hope of the second referendum having been dashed, and seeing what Johnson signed off as "oven-ready for the microwave" I might have had Bregret.
People desperate to write Newcastle off this season, believing last season was some kind of fluke. I think their story is only just beginning…the atmosphere at St James’ will rattle opposition players all season long…what a place…
Do the partisans of Labour attacking Sunak, or the Tory partisans attacking Starmer, really expect me to simply vote for either them because of the character assassinations of opponents.
As it happens, fearing a one-party state (or a civil war) that their most emphatic statements imply, I shall vote for neither.
“Flexcit” was the only Brexit that ever made sense. Move over time from EEA toward something else.
It had the “disadvantage” that it was a soft Brexit (in the old sense, ie it retained single market access), and that it didn’t have a clear timetable on it, thus open to criticism that was vulnerable to politically-driven stasis.
This was the one that Alastair Meeks was seriously considering.
He described it as a 'conscious uncoupling' from the EU via the EEC.
In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault.
Astonishing.
Was it only Brexit that was Labour's fault, or everything Johnson did wrong in government? Or maybe everything he ever did wrong in his life?
Your sarcasm meter needs adjusting. Cutting all of the context out of the post doesn’t help.
I think you need the help of a dictionary. If someone makes a ridiculous assertion, and they're asked to clarify it, the fact that the assertion was ridiculous hardly makes the question sarcastic!
In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault.
Astonishing.
Was it only Brexit that was Labour's fault, or everything Johnson did wrong in government? Or maybe everything he ever did wrong in his life?
Your sarcasm meter needs adjusting. Cutting all of the context out of the post doesn’t help.
I think you need the help of a dictionary. If someone makes a ridiculous assertion, and they're asked to clarify it, the fact that the assertion was ridiculous hardly makes the question sarcastic!
Read the rest of the comment. They were clearly responding sarcastically and not literally.
I would quite like to read Theresa May’s book to understand her thinking and tactics in that critical period between the Brexit vote and the 2017 election.
You never get a decent understanding from the commentariat.
I’m still waiting for her masterplan to deliver us a soft Brexit….
She left all her planning to Nick Timothy. Simple misunderstanding. She thought a masturbator was somebody who good at baiting people.
And then she appointed Gavin Barwell as her Chief of Staff, a histrionic dweeb who was just as ashamed of our history as anyone on the Left.
In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault.
Astonishing.
Was it only Brexit that was Labour's fault, or everything Johnson did wrong in government? Or maybe everything he ever did wrong in his life?
Your sarcasm meter needs adjusting. Cutting all of the context out of the post doesn’t help.
I think you need the help of a dictionary. If someone makes a ridiculous assertion, and they're asked to clarify it, the fact that the assertion was ridiculous hardly makes the question sarcastic!
Read the rest of the comment. They were clearly responding sarcastically and not literally.
If so, I'm happy to hear it. But if people post ridiculous stuff sarcastically on a forum where people post ridiculous stuff earnestly, they can hardly complain if people think they are being earnest!
In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault.
Astonishing.
Was it only Brexit that was Labour's fault, or everything Johnson did wrong in government? Or maybe everything he ever did wrong in his life?
Your sarcasm meter needs adjusting. Cutting all of the context out of the post doesn’t help.
I think you need the help of a dictionary. If someone makes a ridiculous assertion, and they're asked to clarify it, the fact that the assertion was ridiculous hardly makes the question sarcastic!
Read the rest of the comment. They were clearly responding sarcastically and not literally.
A failure of punctuation on my part. But yes @Chris was a little impish to remove the statement from the full post.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
Good to see you back posting Moon. You been away on holiday or something?
Absence more subtle but straightforward than that.
I was banned on evening before Huw Edwards outed himself when in hospital, only for one day like Leon. After few seconds bewilderment I had absolutely no problem with it. those just coming on that evening I posted Leon had been banned for posting a subtle Mabinogion quote, so don’t do the same thing.
🤦♀️
the site was full of why are people putting the site in danger, themselves in danger of being taken to court. So although I read everyday I kept away from the log in button.
My daddy can pay any court costs and fines, but I don’t want to take him there after all family grief of my brother to court for posting incel like things on social media - he was going through a phase when he thought he was an historic Templar and should run the country like they did. I am posting lot less replies now and carefully considering each post for two minutes now before posting. Like Lord Percy carefully considered it when given the choice to shut up, or have his head cut off didn’t offer a hasty reply. Sensible.
Although PB argues over degree the site is threatened of litigation or the bad individual who posts something is, there is another important element. I absolutely appreciate why social media sites need to be careful at times like that, not only a threat of litigation, loss of revenue and advertisers etc, it’s also about having to do the right thing by people in this world who haven’t even done anything and get caught up in witch hunts and smears - it’s about being a socially responsible (social) media. And with limited number of admins to police postings it’s a difficult task, the fair ask has to be for all members with posting rights in a community, to be careful and to be decent and responsible people, and police themself effectively. If we are good people, we shouldn’t even need to be advised or warned of a duty of care to the site and to people everywhere.
I clearly got a blind spot at this sort of thing, I try not to be an offender at all and engage patiently and politely and in good humour, but I am a repeat PB posting offender with lots of bans! I don’t have Twitter, banning me proves it’s flipping good I never attempted Twitter or social media as I would not know when to ban myself.
Conservatives will deffo do worse than UNS. In 2019, they benefited from anti-Jez tactical voting, and nobody (OK, hardly anybody) is going to go out of their way to vote against Keir Beige.
Interestingly, Theresa May blames Labour Brexiteers for jumping to Boris.
Blames them for what?
Theresa May has done a book she is plugging, and says the 2019 result was due to Labour Brexiteers rather than Labour anti-Jezzers jumping to Con.
Ok so she is saying the pro-Boris Brexitism was a more potent force than anti-Jezzism.
I think that’s right, although it’s a surprise to hear her make that argument. I would caveat by saying that Boris’s most compelling offer was to “Get It Done” rather than any of the accompanying Brexitology.
The desire to end the paralysis in government was widespread.
2019 also has to be read as a verdict on those who were stalling in the hope of overturning Brexit. They were judged to have been primarily responsible for the paralysis.
Labour Remainers could have avoided the 2019 Johnson premiership if they'd voted for May's deal.
At the time you were convinced we would not even Brexit. You might be right in your analysis, but you were a fervent and resolute member of the die-hard remainer coalition.
I think the die-hard remainer coalition did come close to succeeding, but ultimately blew itself up because of tactical mistakes due to Boris Derangement Syndrome.
You should elaborate on this. It’s an interesting thesis.
There were several turning points, and the narrative was so torturous it’s hard to remember them all.
The first mistake (from both a Remain and Brexit perspective) was probably exercising Article 50 without a coherent end point in mind.
No, Cameron should have kept his promise to call A50 immediately after a "Leave" vote. That would have concentrated minds, on all sides, of what kind of Brexit was best, and not let any Remainer hopes of blocking Brexit surface.
In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault.
Astonishing.
Was it only Brexit that was Labour's fault, or everything Johnson did wrong in government? Or maybe everything he ever did wrong in his life?
Your sarcasm meter needs adjusting. Cutting all of the context out of the post doesn’t help.
I think you need the help of a dictionary. If someone makes a ridiculous assertion, and they're asked to clarify it, the fact that the assertion was ridiculous hardly makes the question sarcastic!
Read the rest of the comment. They were clearly responding sarcastically and not literally.
If so, I'm happy to hear it. But if people post ridiculous stuff sarcastically on a forum where people post ridiculous stuff earnestly, they can hardly complain if people think they are being earnest!
Well I did point it out to you, but you just snapped back at me.
Labour are particularly useless and Starmer in particular, utterly inept. Nonetheless your analysis is absurd. In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault. Labour own Brexit! If I had been an MP in the Parliament of shame, I would have voted down May's deal. It was rubbish. It…
The highlighted part made it obvious that the following sentence was being made sarcastically. You helpfully cut that bit out when you replied.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
Good to see you back posting Moon. You been away on holiday or something?
Absence more subtle but straightforward than that.
I was banned on evening before Huw Edwards outed himself when in hospital, only for one day like Leon. After few seconds bewilderment I had absolutely no problem with it. those just coming on that evening I posted Leon had been banned for posting a subtle Mabinogion quote, so don’t do the same thing.
🤦♀️
the site was full of why are people putting the site in danger, themselves in danger of being taken to court. So although I read everyday I kept away from the log in button.
My daddy can pay any court costs and fines, but I don’t want to take him there after all family grief of my brother to court for posting incel like things on social media - he was going through a phase when he thought he was an historic Templar and should run the country like they did. I am posting lot less replies now and carefully considering each post for two minutes now before posting. Like Lord Percy carefully considered it when given the choice to shut up, or have his head cut off didn’t offer a hasty reply. Sensible.
Although PB argues over degree the site is threatened of litigation or the bad individual who posts something is, there is another important element. I absolutely appreciate why social media sites need to be careful at times like that, not only a threat of litigation, loss of revenue and advertisers etc, it’s also about having to do the right thing by people in this world who haven’t even done anything and get caught up in witch hunts and smears - it’s about being a socially responsible (social) media. And with limited number of admins to police postings it’s a difficult task, the fair ask has to be for all members with posting rights in a community, to be careful and to be decent and responsible people, and police themself effectively. If we are good people, we shouldn’t even need to be advised or warned of a duty of care to the site and to people everywhere.
I clearly got a blind spot at this sort of thing, I try not to be an offender at all and engage patiently and politely and in good humour, but I am a repeat PB posting offender with lots of bans! I don’t have Twitter, banning me proves it’s flipping good I never attempted Twitter or social media as I would not know when to ban myself.
I didn’t actually know it was Huw Edwards as I hadn’t gone looking, and it came as a huge and very sad shock to me next day. 🥺
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
Good to see you back posting Moon. You been away on holiday or something?
Absence more subtle but straightforward than that.
I was banned on evening before Huw Edwards outed himself when in hospital, only for one day like Leon. After few seconds bewilderment I had absolutely no problem with it. those just coming on that evening I posted Leon had been banned for posting a subtle Mabinogion quote, so don’t do the same thing.
🤦♀️
the site was full of why are people putting the site in danger, themselves in danger of being taken to court. So although I read everyday I kept away from the log in button.
My daddy can pay any court costs and fines, but I don’t want to take him there after all family grief of my brother to court for posting incel like things on social media - he was going through a phase when he thought he was an historic Templar and should run the country like they did. I am posting lot less replies now and carefully considering each post for two minutes now before posting. Like Lord Percy carefully considered it when given the choice to shut up, or have his head cut off didn’t offer a hasty reply. Sensible.
Although PB argues over degree the site is threatened of litigation or the bad individual who posts something is, there is another important element. I absolutely appreciate why social media sites need to be careful at times like that, not only a threat of litigation, loss of revenue and advertisers etc, it’s also about having to do the right thing by people in this world who haven’t even done anything and get caught up in witch hunts and smears - it’s about being a socially responsible (social) media. And with limited number of admins to police postings it’s a difficult task, the fair ask has to be for all members with posting rights in a community, to be careful and to be decent and responsible people, and police themself effectively. If we are good people, we shouldn’t even need to be advised or warned of a duty of care to the site and to people everywhere.
I clearly got a blind spot at this sort of thing, I try not to be an offender at all and engage patiently and politely and in good humour, but I am a repeat PB posting offender with lots of bans! I don’t have Twitter, banning me proves it’s flipping good I never attempted Twitter or social media as I would not know when to ban myself.
I didn’t actually know it was Huw Edwards as I hadn’t gone looking, and it came as a huge and very sad shock to me next day. 🥺
You weren’t banned. You just changed your profile picture to the banned image.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
You could say that Truss had already become Sunak prior to resigning when she backtracked and appointed Hunt.
But that was different in trying to save her political life, not doing what she actually believed. Like a Protestant converting to Catholicism on the night of the St Bartholomew Massacre.
Her political blood ended up running through the gutter anyway.
The question is what would Trotsky have needed to do to save his position at the head of the USSR? Probably not what he actually believed in.
The actual answer is Stalin did do exactly as he thought and pleased “because” he didn’t believe in the degree of democratic challenge Marx, Lenin and Trotsky understood to be so important to the philosophy of a workers movement taking ownership of the means of production and control.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
Good to see you back posting Moon. You been away on holiday or something?
Absence more subtle but straightforward than that.
I was banned on evening before Huw Edwards outed himself when in hospital, only for one day like Leon. After few seconds bewilderment I had absolutely no problem with it. those just coming on that evening I posted Leon had been banned for posting a subtle Mabinogion quote, so don’t do the same thing.
🤦♀️
the site was full of why are people putting the site in danger, themselves in danger of being taken to court. So although I read everyday I kept away from the log in button.
My daddy can pay any court costs and fines, but I don’t want to take him there after all family grief of my brother to court for posting incel like things on social media - he was going through a phase when he thought he was an historic Templar and should run the country like they did. I am posting lot less replies now and carefully considering each post for two minutes now before posting. Like Lord Percy carefully considered it when given the choice to shut up, or have his head cut off didn’t offer a hasty reply. Sensible.
Although PB argues over degree the site is threatened of litigation or the bad individual who posts something is, there is another important element. I absolutely appreciate why social media sites need to be careful at times like that, not only a threat of litigation, loss of revenue and advertisers etc, it’s also about having to do the right thing by people in this world who haven’t even done anything and get caught up in witch hunts and smears - it’s about being a socially responsible (social) media. And with limited number of admins to police postings it’s a difficult task, the fair ask has to be for all members with posting rights in a community, to be careful and to be decent and responsible people, and police themself effectively. If we are good people, we shouldn’t even need to be advised or warned of a duty of care to the site and to people everywhere.
I clearly got a blind spot at this sort of thing, I try not to be an offender at all and engage patiently and politely and in good humour, but I am a repeat PB posting offender with lots of bans! I don’t have Twitter, banning me proves it’s flipping good I never attempted Twitter or social media as I would not know when to ban myself.
I didn’t actually know it was Huw Edwards as I hadn’t gone looking, and it came as a huge and very sad shock to me next day. 🥺
You weren’t banned. You just changed your profile picture to the banned image.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
Good to see you back posting Moon. You been away on holiday or something?
Absence more subtle but straightforward than that.
I was banned on evening before Huw Edwards outed himself when in hospital, only for one day like Leon. After few seconds bewilderment I had absolutely no problem with it. those just coming on that evening I posted Leon had been banned for posting a subtle Mabinogion quote, so don’t do the same thing.
🤦♀️
the site was full of why are people putting the site in danger, themselves in danger of being taken to court. So although I read everyday I kept away from the log in button.
My daddy can pay any court costs and fines, but I don’t want to take him there after all family grief of my brother to court for posting incel like things on social media - he was going through a phase when he thought he was an historic Templar and should run the country like they did. I am posting lot less replies now and carefully considering each post for two minutes now before posting. Like Lord Percy carefully considered it when given the choice to shut up, or have his head cut off didn’t offer a hasty reply. Sensible.
Although PB argues over degree the site is threatened of litigation or the bad individual who posts something is, there is another important element. I absolutely appreciate why social media sites need to be careful at times like that, not only a threat of litigation, loss of revenue and advertisers etc, it’s also about having to do the right thing by people in this world who haven’t even done anything and get caught up in witch hunts and smears - it’s about being a socially responsible (social) media. And with limited number of admins to police postings it’s a difficult task, the fair ask has to be for all members with posting rights in a community, to be careful and to be decent and responsible people, and police themself effectively. If we are good people, we shouldn’t even need to be advised or warned of a duty of care to the site and to people everywhere.
I clearly got a blind spot at this sort of thing, I try not to be an offender at all and engage patiently and politely and in good humour, but I am a repeat PB posting offender with lots of bans! I don’t have Twitter, banning me proves it’s flipping good I never attempted Twitter or social media as I would not know when to ban myself.
I didn’t actually know it was Huw Edwards as I hadn’t gone looking, and it came as a huge and very sad shock to me next day. 🥺
You weren’t banned. You just changed your profile picture to the banned image.
Worcestershire collapsing in an embarrassing heap here.
Perhaps you might consider, patronizing a somewhat better class of steakhouse?
I'm sure there's a pun in there, but I've no idea what it is.
Anyway, I only patronize civil servants, on the grounds they are much stupider than I am and deserve it.
Us colonials mostly know Worcestershire as a steak sauce NOT as an English county.
And about (or perhaps at least) half of us pronounce it "Wur-cess-ter-shire" when banging the back the bottom of the bottle, to get some on our sirloin or what-have-you.
Don’t worry SSI, I got it, but I did have to think about it.
One for you Doug: I was listening to this earlier when planning some music for choir.
Worcestershire collapsing in an embarrassing heap here.
Perhaps you might consider, patronizing a somewhat better class of steakhouse?
I'm sure there's a pun in there, but I've no idea what it is.
Anyway, I only patronize civil servants, on the grounds they are much stupider than I am and deserve it.
Us colonials mostly know Worcestershire as a steak sauce NOT as an English county.
And about (or perhaps at least) half of us pronounce it "Wur-cess-ter-shire" when banging the back the bottom of the bottle, to get some on our sirloin or what-have-you.
Don’t worry SSI, I got it, but I did have to think about it.
One for you Doug: I was listening to this earlier when planning some music for choir.
Theresa May’s political judgement was terrible, both on her own benches and out across to the opposition.
That's why she failed. There was a place to deliver a soft Brexit but it demanded strong political skills, which she didn't have.
The situation probably called for a truly extraordinary political figure. Strong vision to drive things yet capable of flexibility given the divisiveness that had to be dealt with, charismatic enough to convince the party, parliament and public of things, and smart enough to see the most suitable path.
She was not up to it. I'm not sure who might have been, but it's not like many were even putting themselves forward for the task.
Tactical voting remains the elephant in the political room. We know it has happened - there's plenty of evidence it continues to happen and there's only party which loses overall.
The problem for the LDs in 2024 is they son't have the strength they had in 1997 - I believe there are just 90 constituencies where the party was second to the Conservatives in 2019 and of course we can probably rule out about half as unreachable so the LD effort will be in about 50 seats next time - to win 30-35 of those (with the aid of tactical voting) will be a strong result.
Redfield & Wilton have identified significant numbers of Labour and LD supporters who will vote tactically to defeat an incumbent Conservative.
Take a seat like Chelmsford - the 202nd safest Conservative seat with a majority of 17,621 last time. The LDs run the council and strengthened their hold this year. With over 10,000 Labour votes to squeeze, could that be a surprise gain despite needing a 15.4% swing? I don't know but it's the kind of seat which could produce an upset if tactical voting is a potent enough force.
It's stretching it to assume that the LDs are always better placed to win in the seats where they came 2nd to the Conservatives in 2019.
Take the latest YouGov (19% Lab lead) and apply UNS to your example of Chelmsford. You get: Con 37.2% Lab 30.1% LD 23.3% There is certainly scope for anti-Conservative tactical voting but those figures make a case for LD not Labour voters switching tactically. The boundary review will complicate things further, of course.
On topic. The Tories won't do worse than the polls. But tactical voting may disguise the extent of swing back.
We are in agreement, there will be tactical voting. But as psephologists and political bettors, it’s about anticipating exactly what and where. And why.
Our genial host has often pointed us to the largish lake of don’t knows out there, we need to keep an eye on it, if/when this starts to drain, is it breaking to the Tory total as much as it will need to?
The poll lead? Not for me, I prefer to keep an eye on what parties are polling, not the lead in the methodologies. Yes the lead shrinks, but if the most discernible movement in the polling is Lab to LibDem, and not Tory recovery, this is the scariest scenario bar none for the Tories in terms of tactical voting, the combined Lab+LibDem numbers in Blue Wall polling in particular.
There could be a gradual, almost unseen at first, move from Labour to LibDem over the next 12 months, though like have said so many times, I don’t think voters are at all honest with pollsters about tactical vote in all these polls we are seeing. An exit poll and PV so very different than the actual polls would not surprise me.
For example, if the polls in the last week of the General Election Campaign suggest a variant of Lab 43, Con 29, Lib Dem 12, reform 6 - a drop for Labour, rise for Con and Lib Dem from poll average today, I would not be shocked by a contrary exit poll of Lab 38 Con 28 LibDem 17, Ref 2. Not that Reform polling breaks to LibDem, the Refs sit on their hands disgusted with their own enablement of a parliament of incompetence and outright corruption, whilst LLG tactical votes always knew what to do in General Election, just never told pollsters about it. That would not surprise me one bit. In fact the resulting carnage would closely mirror real votes at the 2023 locals. A mirror of 2023 local election night is what I am expecting on General Election night, without expecting to ever see this in the polling.
If your "Dutch Salute" theory works out, it'll go down with @RodCrosby's prediction of a 2015 Con majority and @Andy_JS's spreadsheet as the best pieces of analysis in PB history
- We are ready to fight for a long time if we will not lose people. Minimizing casualties. Like, for example, Israel. We can live like this.
- I do not think it is right to transfer hostilities to the territory of Russia. There is a great risk that in such a case we will be left alone.
- If we are on the administrative border with Crimea, I think we can politically to push for the demilitarization of Russia on the territory of the peninsula. I think it would be better. Better, first of all, for those who would carry it out. Any war is still casualties, no matter where it is.
- Ukraine needs to grow up and know that at one point or another Ukraine may be alone. Some of the partners may break away at one moment.
- Many debts during this war, I am sure, will be restructured, but there will be no gifts.
- I have set a task, lawmakers will be asked to equate corruption with treason for the duration of the war. I realize that this cannot be in effect permanently, but for wartime, I think it will help.
- I don't want people to have the attitude of holding on to power. I'm not holding on to anything. I would like to hold elections.
- For me, as a president, it is important to have a victory that would make it impossible for the fighting to return. And that the people remain united.
In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault.
Astonishing.
Was it only Brexit that was Labour's fault, or everything Johnson did wrong in government? Or maybe everything he ever did wrong in his life?
That was not my view but my summary of MoonRabbit's narrative. A failure of punctuation.
Right. Thanks for clarifying. I should just stop reading the stuff here probably.
Just stop reading my s***e and you'll be fine.
Boris and the ERG got the Brexit they wanted. Bully for them. They didn't do it cos Labour made them, they did it because Labour gave them the chance.
Had Labour - or sufficient Labour MPs - wanted to force a soft Brexit, they could have done. But they chose not to. They gambled that dicking about for long enough would see something turn up.
Personally, I'm moderately happy about it. My view is the Brexit we got is better than what May negotiated or what a Labour Brexit might have been. But the opportunity for a soft Brexit or a BRINO was there, if Remainer MPs hadn't been so pig headed.
Theresa May’s political judgement was terrible, both on her own benches and out across to the opposition.
That's why she failed. There was a place to deliver a soft Brexit but it demanded strong political skills, which she didn't have.
The situation probably called for a truly extraordinary political figure. Strong vision to drive things yet capable of flexibility given the divisiveness that had to be dealt with, charismatic enough to convince the party, parliament and public of things, and smart enough to see the most suitable path.
She was not up to it. I'm not sure who might have been, but it's not like many were even putting themselves forward for the task.
And any project that only works with a genius at the helm is probably a bad project. As we're probably seeing right now.
The only person with the dexterity, verve and shamelessness to pull it off was Boris. At what point did he become too tied to the maximum freedom / "divorce with ongoing sex" strand of Brexit to steer the UK into some version of an EEA relationship?
In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault.
Astonishing.
Was it only Brexit that was Labour's fault, or everything Johnson did wrong in government? Or maybe everything he ever did wrong in his life?
That was not my view but my summary of MoonRabbit's narrative. A failure of punctuation.
Right. Thanks for clarifying. I should just stop reading the stuff here probably.
Just stop reading my s***e and you'll be fine.
Boris and the ERG got the Brexit they wanted. Bully for them. They didn't do it cos Labour made them, they did it because Labour gave them the chance.
Had Labour - or sufficient Labour MPs - wanted to force a soft Brexit, they could have done. But they chose not to. They gambled that dicking about for long enough would see something turn up.
Personally, I'm moderately happy about it. My view is the Brexit we got is better than what May negotiated or what a Labour Brexit might have been. But the opportunity for a soft Brexit or a BRINO was there, if Remainer MPs hadn't been so pig headed.
I'm happy in the sense that we got the Brexit the Tories and Johnson wanted and the public are deciding it was a bad idea. Not Labour's Brexit, not Labour's negotiation, not Labour's policy. This is a Tory project through and through and like Iraq this will stick to the Tories for good.
Tactical voting remains the elephant in the political room. We know it has happened - there's plenty of evidence it continues to happen and there's only party which loses overall.
The problem for the LDs in 2024 is they son't have the strength they had in 1997 - I believe there are just 90 constituencies where the party was second to the Conservatives in 2019 and of course we can probably rule out about half as unreachable so the LD effort will be in about 50 seats next time - to win 30-35 of those (with the aid of tactical voting) will be a strong result.
Redfield & Wilton have identified significant numbers of Labour and LD supporters who will vote tactically to defeat an incumbent Conservative.
Take a seat like Chelmsford - the 202nd safest Conservative seat with a majority of 17,621 last time. The LDs run the council and strengthened their hold this year. With over 10,000 Labour votes to squeeze, could that be a surprise gain despite needing a 15.4% swing? I don't know but it's the kind of seat which could produce an upset if tactical voting is a potent enough force.
“and there's only party which loses overall.” You mean the Tories? I dispute this.
What the “tactical voting” in our FPTP system is, it’s the centre ground of UK choosing which of Conservative or Labour to put in power. So I argue the last 15 years have seen much anti Labour tactical voting that has kept the Conservatives in, and Labour, particularly Corbyn Labour UK centre ground didn’t like at all, out.
Off topic, I assume that there still is such a thing as the Edinburgh Festival? Going off the TV, there is only the Fringe.
It seems to me that, at some point in the 90s, youth culture in the 70s became codified as mainstream culture at the broadcasters, and over time ossified. How else to explain the never-ending flow of stand-up comedians on TV doing everything from game shows to political commentary.
Hmm! Maybe rather longer than that? I remember going to a play by some Oxbridge group somewhere in the lower part of the High Street sometime around 1980 and seeing one R. Atkinson.
- We are ready to fight for a long time if we will not lose people. Minimizing casualties. Like, for example, Israel. We can live like this.
- I do not think it is right to transfer hostilities to the territory of Russia. There is a great risk that in such a case we will be left alone.
- If we are on the administrative border with Crimea, I think we can politically to push for the demilitarization of Russia on the territory of the peninsula. I think it would be better. Better, first of all, for those who would carry it out. Any war is still casualties, no matter where it is.
- Ukraine needs to grow up and know that at one point or another Ukraine may be alone. Some of the partners may break away at one moment.
- Many debts during this war, I am sure, will be restructured, but there will be no gifts.
- I have set a task, lawmakers will be asked to equate corruption with treason for the duration of the war. I realize that this cannot be in effect permanently, but for wartime, I think it will help.
- I don't want people to have the attitude of holding on to power. I'm not holding on to anything. I would like to hold elections.
- For me, as a president, it is important to have a victory that would make it impossible for the fighting to return. And that the people remain united.
''Ukraine needs to grow up and know that at one point or another Ukraine may be alone. Some of the partners may break away at one moment."
No doubt speaking (at first instance anyhow) of the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo and fellow Grifters-On-Parade.
Any discussion of potential of tactical voting at next UK GE, should probably begin with how tactical voting played out way back in the distant past - 1997.
Off topic, I assume that there still is such a thing as the Edinburgh Festival? Going off the TV, there is only the Fringe.
It seems to me that, at some point in the 90s, youth culture in the 70s became codified as mainstream culture at the broadcasters, and over time ossified. How else to explain the never-ending flow of stand-up comedians on TV doing everything from game shows to political commentary.
Hmm! Maybe rather longer than that? I remember going to a play by some Oxbridge group somewhere in the lower part of the High Street sometime around 1980 and seeing one R. Atkinson.
The Football Manager. Wow.
I saw a 24hr long play.
Breaking news.
No. The Second Woman.
Which is Keely Hodgkinson, alas. Good race though.
In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault.
Astonishing.
Was it only Brexit that was Labour's fault, or everything Johnson did wrong in government? Or maybe everything he ever did wrong in his life?
That was not my view but my summary of MoonRabbit's narrative. A failure of punctuation.
Right. Thanks for clarifying. I should just stop reading the stuff here probably.
Just stop reading my s***e and you'll be fine.
Boris and the ERG got the Brexit they wanted. Bully for them. They didn't do it cos Labour made them, they did it because Labour gave them the chance.
Had Labour - or sufficient Labour MPs - wanted to force a soft Brexit, they could have done. But they chose not to. They gambled that dicking about for long enough would see something turn up.
Personally, I'm moderately happy about it. My view is the Brexit we got is better than what May negotiated or what a Labour Brexit might have been. But the opportunity for a soft Brexit or a BRINO was there, if Remainer MPs hadn't been so pig headed.
It really never was once May set out her red lines. Ultra soft Brexit was never on the table. It could have been had Mrs May held her nerve and not attempted to placate the nutters. But in the Summer of 2016 even the ERG didn't have the foggiest idea of what "Brexit means Brexit" meant, least of all Johnson.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
You could say that Truss had already become Sunak prior to resigning when she backtracked and appointed Hunt.
But that was different in trying to save her political life, not doing what she actually believed. Like a Protestant converting to Catholicism on the night of the St Bartholomew Massacre.
Her political blood ended up running through the gutter anyway.
The question is what would Trotsky have needed to do to save his position at the head of the USSR? Probably not what he actually believed in.
The actual answer is Stalin did do exactly as he thought and pleased “because” he didn’t believe in the degree of democratic challenge Marx, Lenin and Trotsky understood to be so important to the philosophy of a workers movement taking ownership of the means of production and control.
Lenin and Trotsky believed that? Really?
That is the argument I am making, yes. At least to the degree that Stalin believed something different, was not a fellow traveller with them as to the degree his authority should be democratically and philosophically challenged. This being that difference between Marx, Lenin and Trotsky on the one hand, and Stalin on the other, and pretty much supported by Trotsky fleeing to exile as well as the Trotskyite faction George Orwell joined being crushed in the same brutal way by same Stalinist agency and for same purpose as Trotsky’s assassination.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
You could say that Truss had already become Sunak prior to resigning when she backtracked and appointed Hunt.
But that was different in trying to save her political life, not doing what she actually believed. Like a Protestant converting to Catholicism on the night of the St Bartholomew Massacre.
Her political blood ended up running through the gutter anyway.
The question is what would Trotsky have needed to do to save his position at the head of the USSR? Probably not what he actually believed in.
The actual answer is Stalin did do exactly as he thought and pleased “because” he didn’t believe in the degree of democratic challenge Marx, Lenin and Trotsky understood to be so important to the philosophy of a workers movement taking ownership of the means of production and control.
Lenin and Trotsky believed that? Really?
That is the argument I am making, yes. At least to the degree that Stalin believed something different, was not a fellow traveller with them as to the degree his authority should be democratically and philosophically challenged. This being that difference between Marx, Lenin and Trotsky on the one hand, and Stalin on the other, and pretty much supported by Trotsky fleeing to exile as well as the Trotskyite faction George Orwell joined being crushed in the same brutal way by same Stalinist agency and for same purpose as Trotsky’s assassination.
Trotsky didn't 'flee into exile.' He was sent to Kazakhstan (literally dragged out of his house in his pyjamas) in 1928 and expelled from the Soviet Union altogether in 1929.
Proper banned for 1 day. Yes, self banned to consider what I done wrong.
And embarrassed.
And a bit frightened next social media mess up lands my family back in court. Tbh.
Who is the woman in the photo?
It’s not me. But it shows I am not the only lover of piggies.
No I haven’t got a mini one. For one thing just one might miss pig company on its own, so it needs two as they are social creatures, and an inner city flat doesn’t give it enough required snouting around undergrowth or mud it will need everyday. It would get more than enough cuddles and tummy rubs, but not enough of the outside to satisfy its natural instincts. If that makes any sense.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
You could say that Truss had already become Sunak prior to resigning when she backtracked and appointed Hunt.
But that was different in trying to save her political life, not doing what she actually believed. Like a Protestant converting to Catholicism on the night of the St Bartholomew Massacre.
Her political blood ended up running through the gutter anyway.
The question is what would Trotsky have needed to do to save his position at the head of the USSR? Probably not what he actually believed in.
The actual answer is Stalin did do exactly as he thought and pleased “because” he didn’t believe in the degree of democratic challenge Marx, Lenin and Trotsky understood to be so important to the philosophy of a workers movement taking ownership of the means of production and control.
Lenin and Trotsky believed that? Really?
That is the argument I am making, yes. At least to the degree that Stalin believed something different, was not a fellow traveller with them as to the degree his authority should be democratically and philosophically challenged. This being that difference between Marx, Lenin and Trotsky on the one hand, and Stalin on the other, and pretty much supported by Trotsky fleeing to exile as well as the Trotskyite faction George Orwell joined being crushed in the same brutal way by same Stalinist agency and for same purpose as Trotsky’s assassination.
Trotsky and chums were just as murderous as Stalin - they just wanted to murder a different, but overlapping set of people.
Both Lenin and Trotsky believed in the kind of “democracy” where the people were told what to do by the right leaders. And none of that multi party voting nonesense.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
You could say that Truss had already become Sunak prior to resigning when she backtracked and appointed Hunt.
But that was different in trying to save her political life, not doing what she actually believed. Like a Protestant converting to Catholicism on the night of the St Bartholomew Massacre.
Her political blood ended up running through the gutter anyway.
The question is what would Trotsky have needed to do to save his position at the head of the USSR? Probably not what he actually believed in.
The actual answer is Stalin did do exactly as he thought and pleased “because” he didn’t believe in the degree of democratic challenge Marx, Lenin and Trotsky understood to be so important to the philosophy of a workers movement taking ownership of the means of production and control.
Lenin and Trotsky believed that? Really?
That is the argument I am making, yes. At least to the degree that Stalin believed something different, was not a fellow traveller with them as to the degree his authority should be democratically and philosophically challenged. This being that difference between Marx, Lenin and Trotsky on the one hand, and Stalin on the other, and pretty much supported by Trotsky fleeing to exile as well as the Trotskyite faction George Orwell joined being crushed in the same brutal way by same Stalinist agency and for same purpose as Trotsky’s assassination.
Trotsky and chums were just as murderous as Stalin - they just wanted to murder a different, but overlapping set of people.
Both Lenin and Trotsky believed in the kind of “democracy” where the people were told what to do by the right leaders. And none of that multi party voting nonesense.
You are pitiful, isolated individuals! You are bankrupts. Your role is played out. Go where you belong from now on – into the dustbin of history!
Trotsky, dissolving the Constituent Assembly in January 1918. Elected in perhaps the only democratic election ever held in Russia.
Conservatives will deffo do worse than UNS. In 2019, they benefited from anti-Jez tactical voting, and nobody (OK, hardly anybody) is going to go out of their way to vote against Keir Beige.
Interestingly, Theresa May blames Labour Brexiteers for jumping to Boris.
Blames them for what?
Theresa May has done a book she is plugging, and says the 2019 result was due to Labour Brexiteers rather than Labour anti-Jezzers jumping to Con.
Ok so she is saying the pro-Boris Brexitism was a more potent force than anti-Jezzism.
I think that’s right, although it’s a surprise to hear her make that argument. I would caveat by saying that Boris’s most compelling offer was to “Get It Done” rather than any of the accompanying Brexitology.
The desire to end the paralysis in government was widespread.
2019 also has to be read as a verdict on those who were stalling in the hope of overturning Brexit. They were judged to have been primarily responsible for the paralysis.
Labour Remainers could have avoided the 2019 Johnson premiership if they'd voted for May's deal.
At the time you were convinced we would not even Brexit. You might be right in your analysis, but you were a fervent and resolute member of the die-hard remainer coalition.
I think the die-hard remainer coalition did come close to succeeding, but ultimately blew itself up because of tactical mistakes due to Boris Derangement Syndrome.
You should elaborate on this. It’s an interesting thesis.
There were several turning points, and the narrative was so torturous it’s hard to remember them all.
The first mistake (from both a Remain and Brexit perspective) was probably exercising Article 50 without a coherent end point in mind.
No, Cameron should have kept his promise to call A50 immediately after a "Leave" vote. That would have concentrated minds, on all sides, of what kind of Brexit was best, and not let any Remainer hopes of blocking Brexit surface.
Astonishing to see such a silly sentiment written out.
“Let’s trigger an irrevocable international agreement with no plan, and let’s do it quickly before anyone can stop us”.
PB Pop Quiz - Who were the four Brits, who first became Prime Minister with zero previous ministerial experience?
Ramsay MacDonald, Tony Blair, and David Cameron are the three I know.
I wondered about Bute, but he had been a minister, briefly.
Edit - I suppose technically a case could be made that Wellington had not been an official Cabinet minister, but as Master General of the Ordnance and Commander in Chief of the Army he had in effect been a member of the cabinet and certainly he was politically very important to the Liverpool government.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
You could say that Truss had already become Sunak prior to resigning when she backtracked and appointed Hunt.
But that was different in trying to save her political life, not doing what she actually believed. Like a Protestant converting to Catholicism on the night of the St Bartholomew Massacre.
Her political blood ended up running through the gutter anyway.
The question is what would Trotsky have needed to do to save his position at the head of the USSR? Probably not what he actually believed in.
The actual answer is Stalin did do exactly as he thought and pleased “because” he didn’t believe in the degree of democratic challenge Marx, Lenin and Trotsky understood to be so important to the philosophy of a workers movement taking ownership of the means of production and control.
Lenin and Trotsky believed that? Really?
That is the argument I am making, yes. At least to the degree that Stalin believed something different, was not a fellow traveller with them as to the degree his authority should be democratically and philosophically challenged. This being that difference between Marx, Lenin and Trotsky on the one hand, and Stalin on the other, and pretty much supported by Trotsky fleeing to exile as well as the Trotskyite faction George Orwell joined being crushed in the same brutal way by same Stalinist agency and for same purpose as Trotsky’s assassination.
I don't recall the Soviet Union (and precursor arrangement) of Lenin's time being fans of democratic and philosophical challenge.
It sounds like one of those takes that the nature of Lenin and Trotsky's preferred methods was a difference of kind from Stalin, rather than a difference of degree, which personally I would describe as charitably generous.
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
On topic. The Tories won't do worse than the polls. But tactical voting may disguise the extent of swing back.
We are in agreement, there will be tactical voting. But as psephologists and political bettors, it’s about anticipating exactly what and where. And why.
Our genial host has often pointed us to the largish lake of don’t knows out there, we need to keep an eye on it, if/when this starts to drain, is it breaking to the Tory total as much as it will need to?
The poll lead? Not for me, I prefer to keep an eye on what parties are polling, not the lead in the methodologies. Yes the lead shrinks, but if the most discernible movement in the polling is Lab to LibDem, and not Tory recovery, this is the scariest scenario bar none for the Tories in terms of tactical voting, the combined Lab+LibDem numbers in Blue Wall polling in particular.
There could be a gradual, almost unseen at first, move from Labour to LibDem over the next 12 months, though like have said so many times, I don’t think voters are at all honest with pollsters about tactical vote in all these polls we are seeing. An exit poll and PV so very different than the actual polls would not surprise me.
For example, if the polls in the last week of the General Election Campaign suggest a variant of Lab 43, Con 29, Lib Dem 12, reform 6 - a drop for Labour, rise for Con and Lib Dem from poll average today, I would not be shocked by a contrary exit poll of Lab 38 Con 28 LibDem 17, Ref 2. Not that Reform polling breaks to LibDem, the Refs sit on their hands disgusted with their own enablement of a parliament of incompetence and outright corruption, whilst LLG tactical votes always knew what to do in General Election, just never told pollsters about it. That would not surprise me one bit. In fact the resulting carnage would closely mirror real votes at the 2023 locals. A mirror of 2023 local election night is what I am expecting on General Election night, without expecting to ever see this in the polling.
If your "Dutch Salute" theory works out, it'll go down with @RodCrosby's prediction of a 2015 Con majority and @Andy_JS's spreadsheet as the best pieces of analysis in PB history
I’m not using that phrase anymore. If anyone looks it up in a Viz thesaurus I’ll be banned. Again. But you are right in what I am currently expecting on election night is Labour 38, Con 28, LibDem 17, even if none of the opinion polls ever say this, so a blue wall bloodbath for the Tories like it was in 2023 local elections. And my reasoning is, I don’t think voters give pollsters their honest tactical voting intention, or surely not waiting till the general election campaign to have an idea what that is? 🤷♀️
Proper banned for 1 day. Yes, self banned to consider what I done wrong.
And embarrassed.
And a bit frightened next social media mess up lands my family back in court. Tbh.
Who is the woman in the photo?
It’s not me. But it shows I am not the only lover of piggies.
No I haven’t got a mini one. For one thing just one might miss pig company on its own, so it needs two as they are social creatures, and an inner city flat doesn’t give it enough required snouting around undergrowth or mud it will need everyday. It would get more than enough cuddles and tummy rubs, but not enough of the outside to satisfy its natural instincts. If that makes any sense.
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
From 1996: Satisfied with government: 13 - 22 percent Dissatisfied with government: 69 - 78 percent Satisfied with John Major: 25 - 36 percent Dissatisfied with John Major: 55 - 66 percent
From 2023: Satisfied with government: 12 - 14 percent Dissatisfied with government: 76 - 80 percent Satisfied with Rishi Sunak: 26 - 32 percent Dissatisfied with Rishi Sunak: 54 - 63 percent
Not much in it, really. Major and his government were doing even worse around 1994, and clawed back a bit of reputation after that. But however you look at it, the government is pretty damn unpopular.
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
Brexit was Labour’s fault feels a little bit Ukraine war was provoked by NATO expansion to me.
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
If lisbon had not been ratified which it was despite labours promise we could have a referendum on it. A manifesto promise no less. Then there would have been no article 50 to invoke. Brown and blairs fault completely
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
If lisbon had not been ratified which it was despite labours promise we could have a referendum on it. A manifesto promise no less. Then there would have been no article 50 to invoke. Brown and blairs fault completely
Brexit wouldn't have even been an issue if Cameron hadn't promised it for no reason.
I remember when reading 'Vanished Kingdoms' by Norman Davies being struck by his take on the Soviet Union being impressively blunt, including fairly casual dismissal of the idea it all just went wrong after its start.
Many factors contributed to the Soviet Union's downfall. They include defeat in Afghanistan, an unsustainable arms race, financial bankruptcy, laggardly technology, sclerotic political structures, a discredited ideology, a generation gap between rulers and ruled, and much else besides; discussion of them fills any number of weighty tomes, but none in itself gives a sufficient explanation.
The essence lies deeper, and is not complicated. The Soviet System was built on extreme force and extreme fraud. Practically everything that Lenin and the Leninists did was accompanied by killing; practically everything they said was based on half-baked theories, a total lack of integrity and huge barefaced lies.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
You could say that Truss had already become Sunak prior to resigning when she backtracked and appointed Hunt.
But that was different in trying to save her political life, not doing what she actually believed. Like a Protestant converting to Catholicism on the night of the St Bartholomew Massacre.
Her political blood ended up running through the gutter anyway.
The question is what would Trotsky have needed to do to save his position at the head of the USSR? Probably not what he actually believed in.
The actual answer is Stalin did do exactly as he thought and pleased “because” he didn’t believe in the degree of democratic challenge Marx, Lenin and Trotsky understood to be so important to the philosophy of a workers movement taking ownership of the means of production and control.
Lenin and Trotsky believed that? Really?
That is the argument I am making, yes. At least to the degree that Stalin believed something different, was not a fellow traveller with them as to the degree his authority should be democratically and philosophically challenged. This being that difference between Marx, Lenin and Trotsky on the one hand, and Stalin on the other, and pretty much supported by Trotsky fleeing to exile as well as the Trotskyite faction George Orwell joined being crushed in the same brutal way by same Stalinist agency and for same purpose as Trotsky’s assassination.
I don't recall the Soviet Union (and precursor arrangement) of Lenin's time being fans of democratic and philosophical challenge.
It sounds like one of those takes that the nature of Lenin and Trotsky's preferred methods was a difference of kind from Stalin, rather than a difference of degree, which personally I would describe as charitably generous.
As would anyone who encountered THAT Leon while he was chugging around in his armored train . . . back when he had one during Russian Civil War.
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
I agree. I voted Leave, which I now regard as a mistake, and that's on me.
PB Pop Quiz - Who were the four Brits, who first became Prime Minister with zero previous ministerial experience?
Ramsay MacDonald, Tony Blair, and David Cameron are the three I know.
Three out of four.
In the style of those funky puzzles published by "quality" rags in UK, the Fourth name is famous in the early history of US motor racing.
Hint - as name of county in one of the Carolinas famed, first for running moonshine, then (by natural progression) for stock car racing.
I'm assuming you mean Chatham, but technically (a) Paymaster General is a ministerial office and (b) also technically, the Duke of Devonshire was the official leader of the government.
On topic. The Tories won't do worse than the polls. But tactical voting may disguise the extent of swing back.
We are in agreement, there will be tactical voting. But as psephologists and political bettors, it’s about anticipating exactly what and where. And why.
Our genial host has often pointed us to the largish lake of don’t knows out there, we need to keep an eye on it, if/when this starts to drain, is it breaking to the Tory total as much as it will need to?
The poll lead? Not for me, I prefer to keep an eye on what parties are polling, not the lead in the methodologies. Yes the lead shrinks, but if the most discernible movement in the polling is Lab to LibDem, and not Tory recovery, this is the scariest scenario bar none for the Tories in terms of tactical voting, the combined Lab+LibDem numbers in Blue Wall polling in particular.
There could be a gradual, almost unseen at first, move from Labour to LibDem over the next 12 months, though like have said so many times, I don’t think voters are at all honest with pollsters about tactical vote in all these polls we are seeing. An exit poll and PV so very different than the actual polls would not surprise me.
For example, if the polls in the last week of the General Election Campaign suggest a variant of Lab 43, Con 29, Lib Dem 12, reform 6 - a drop for Labour, rise for Con and Lib Dem from poll average today, I would not be shocked by a contrary exit poll of Lab 38 Con 28 LibDem 17, Ref 2. Not that Reform polling breaks to LibDem, the Refs sit on their hands disgusted with their own enablement of a parliament of incompetence and outright corruption, whilst LLG tactical votes always knew what to do in General Election, just never told pollsters about it. That would not surprise me one bit. In fact the resulting carnage would closely mirror real votes at the 2023 locals. A mirror of 2023 local election night is what I am expecting on General Election night, without expecting to ever see this in the polling.
If your "Dutch Salute" theory works out, it'll go down with @RodCrosby's prediction of a 2015 Con majority and @Andy_JS's spreadsheet as the best pieces of analysis in PB history
I’m not using that phrase anymore. If anyone looks it up in a Viz thesaurus I’ll be banned. Again. But you are right in what I am currently expecting on election night is Labour 38, Con 28, LibDem 17, even if none of the opinion polls ever say this, so a blue wall bloodbath for the Tories like it was in 2023 local elections. And my reasoning is, I don’t think voters give pollsters their honest tactical voting intention, or surely not waiting till the general election campaign to have an idea what that is? 🤷♀️
I thought Dutch salute meant the voters ARE now telling pollsters their true intention, hence the slow decline in Labour and rise in Lib Dem?
Rachel Reeves, Shadow Chancellor, confirms Labour will not introduce a wealth tax, will not increase capital gains tax and will not increase the top rate of income tax.
She instead says economic growth will have to fund public services. Starmer thus continues to dump the last elements of Corbynism from the Labour Party and shift it back towards a Blairite and New Labour agenda
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
If lisbon had not been ratified which it was despite labours promise we could have a referendum on it. A manifesto promise no less. Then there would have been no article 50 to invoke. Brown and blairs fault completely
Brexit wouldn't have even been an issue if Cameron hadn't promised it for no reason.
He promised it because people were angry that politicians had showed the electorate that frankly they didn't have a say on the eu and we were pissed off with that. So of course when they finally were asked we told them and the europhiles to go fuck themselves
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
If lisbon had not been ratified which it was despite labours promise we could have a referendum on it. A manifesto promise no less. Then there would have been no article 50 to invoke. Brown and blairs fault completely
Brexit wouldn't have even been an issue if Cameron hadn't promised it for no reason.
He promised it because people were angry that politicians had showed the electorate that frankly they didn't have a say on the eu and we were pissed off with that. So of course when they finally were asked we told them and the europhiles to go fuck themselves
He promised it to get some votes from UKIP, in the hope he'd never have to do it as he would be governing with Nick again
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
I agree. I voted Leave, which I now regard as a mistake, and that's on me.
The fate for all of those who committed treason and voted Leave.
All this stupid shit on here today and talk of a "single state" explains fucking precisely why so many of your compatriots voted to Leave.
You fed and fuelled it and have no-one to blame but yourselves.
Taking a fucking look at yourselves.
Who is arguing for a “single state”. Maybe @OldKingCole? But I don’t think he deserves such venom.
One of the few things that Orwell got right was that the only truly worthy political goal was a socialist United States of Europe.
Shame Stalin didn’t manage to shoot Orwell for being a Trot, we would have been spared the denigration of pigs. 🐖🐖❤️Not that Animal Farm was Orwell’s idea, his wife wrote it, based on her life under him.
Waiting in Counterfactual Corner is a discussion where Stalin and his idea’s flee to Mexico, and Trotsky is the heir of Lenin, so what would have been different?
I would suggest quite a lot. Take Spanish history alone, if POUM and other Trotskyist parties had not been purged and liquidated by Stalinists in the middle of a conflict with the Nationalists, the whole Spanish history to this date could have been different. Likewise UK and many other countries if Communist parties of the world were not just affiliates of Stalin’s Communist party of the USSR.
I suggest Ace, no one can support both Marx-Lenin-Trotsky on the one hand Stalin-USSR on the other - such a position doesn’t understand such fundamental differences as between anti-capitalist Revolutionary vs. Conservative, or brotherhood of workers v Imperialism.
If the roles were reversed, perhaps the ideals would have been too. Isn't that what a Marxist analysis would say? In other words, Trotsky would have become Stalin.
No. The point is they believed in completely different things. Particularly the absence of the democratic dynamic of being able to question the philosophical direction the leader is taking them with their policies.
Would you argue Sunak has or can become Truss?
You could say that Truss had already become Sunak prior to resigning when she backtracked and appointed Hunt.
But that was different in trying to save her political life, not doing what she actually believed. Like a Protestant converting to Catholicism on the night of the St Bartholomew Massacre.
Her political blood ended up running through the gutter anyway.
The question is what would Trotsky have needed to do to save his position at the head of the USSR? Probably not what he actually believed in.
The actual answer is Stalin did do exactly as he thought and pleased “because” he didn’t believe in the degree of democratic challenge Marx, Lenin and Trotsky understood to be so important to the philosophy of a workers movement taking ownership of the means of production and control.
Lenin and Trotsky believed that? Really?
That is the argument I am making, yes. At least to the degree that Stalin believed something different, was not a fellow traveller with them as to the degree his authority should be democratically and philosophically challenged. This being that difference between Marx, Lenin and Trotsky on the one hand, and Stalin on the other, and pretty much supported by Trotsky fleeing to exile as well as the Trotskyite faction George Orwell joined being crushed in the same brutal way by same Stalinist agency and for same purpose as Trotsky’s assassination.
Trotsky and chums were just as murderous as Stalin - they just wanted to murder a different, but overlapping set of people.
Both Lenin and Trotsky believed in the kind of “democracy” where the people were told what to do by the right leaders. And none of that multi party voting nonesense.
“Both Lenin and Trotsky believed in the kind of “democracy” where the people were told what to do by the right leaders. And none of that multi party voting nonesense.” Yes I agree. to clarify the difference being they believed in the “leadership” group there should always be more democratic challenge.
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
If lisbon had not been ratified which it was despite labours promise we could have a referendum on it. A manifesto promise no less. Then there would have been no article 50 to invoke. Brown and blairs fault completely
Brexit wouldn't have even been an issue if Cameron hadn't promised it for no reason.
He promised it because people were angry that politicians had showed the electorate that frankly they didn't have a say on the eu and we were pissed off with that. So of course when they finally were asked we told them and the europhiles to go fuck themselves
He promised it to get some votes from UKIP, in the hope he'd never have to do it as he would be governing with Nick again
He promised it because the electorate were pissed off with politicians not allowing them a voice. Something the left is always great at..dont let them have a say if they might say something we don't like
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
I agree. I voted Leave, which I now regard as a mistake, and that's on me.
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
I agree. I voted Leave, which I now regard as a mistake, and that's on me.
The fate for all of those who committed treason and voted Leave.
Brexit is totally labours fault. If the brown/blair labour party had given us a vote on lisbon as promised there would not have been a brexit referendum. Anyone suggesting it wasn't labours fault is stupid
No it was the fault of the people who voted for it. None of that passive-aggressive bullshit. Let Leave voters have agency.
If lisbon had not been ratified which it was despite labours promise we could have a referendum on it. A manifesto promise no less. Then there would have been no article 50 to invoke. Brown and blairs fault completely
Brexit wouldn't have even been an issue if Cameron hadn't promised it for no reason.
He promised it because people were angry that politicians had showed the electorate that frankly they didn't have a say on the eu and we were pissed off with that. So of course when they finally were asked we told them and the europhiles to go fuck themselves
He promised it to get some votes from UKIP, in the hope he'd never have to do it as he would be governing with Nick again
He promised it because the electorate were pissed off with politicians not allowing them a voice. Something the left is always great at..dont let them have a say if they might say something we don't like
No he promised it to win an election. He didn't need to promise it, it wasn't even a big issue and if Labour had been in power it would have disappeared.
Comments
Brexit, as is, whether PB posters like it or not is the property of the Conservative Party.
Our genial host has often pointed us to the largish lake of don’t knows out there, we need to keep an eye on it, if/when this starts to drain, is it breaking to the Tory total as much as it will need to?
The poll lead? Not for me, I prefer to keep an eye on what parties are polling, not the lead in the methodologies. Yes the lead shrinks, but if the most discernible movement in the polling is Lab to LibDem, and not Tory recovery, this is the scariest scenario bar none for the Tories in terms of tactical voting, the combined Lab+LibDem numbers in Blue Wall polling in particular.
There could be a gradual, almost unseen at first, move from Labour to LibDem over the next 12 months, though like have said so many times, I don’t think voters are at all honest with pollsters about tactical vote in all these polls we are seeing. An exit poll and PV so very different than the actual polls would not surprise me.
For example, if the polls in the last week of the General Election Campaign suggest a variant of Lab 43, Con 29, Lib Dem 12, reform 6 - a drop for Labour, rise for Con and Lib Dem from poll average today, I would not be shocked by a contrary exit poll of Lab 38 Con 28 LibDem 17, Ref 2. Not that Reform polling breaks to LibDem, the Refs sit on their hands disgusted with their own enablement of a parliament of incompetence and outright corruption, whilst LLG tactical votes always knew what to do in General Election, just never told pollsters about it. That would not surprise me one bit. In fact the resulting carnage would closely mirror real votes at the 2023 locals. A mirror of 2023 local election night is what I am expecting on General Election night, without expecting to ever see this in the polling.
https://twitter.com/mrjakehumphrey/status/1695836227994325432
People desperate to write Newcastle off this season, believing last season was some kind of fluke. I think their story is only just beginning…the atmosphere at St James’ will rattle opposition players all season long…what a place…
“Motion would not have passed anyway.”
Conservatives didn’t have a parliamentary majority. The Unionists could not vote for her deal. The whole situation was chaos and out of control if you don’t even give it a go you can’t know what would have happened.
As it happens, fearing a one-party state (or a civil war) that their most emphatic statements imply, I shall vote for neither.
Tactical voting remains the elephant in the political room. We know it has happened - there's plenty of evidence it continues to happen and there's only party which loses overall.
The problem for the LDs in 2024 is they son't have the strength they had in 1997 - I believe there are just 90 constituencies where the party was second to the Conservatives in 2019 and of course we can probably rule out about half as unreachable so the LD effort will be in about 50 seats next time - to win 30-35 of those (with the aid of tactical voting) will be a strong result.
Redfield & Wilton have identified significant numbers of Labour and LD supporters who will vote tactically to defeat an incumbent Conservative.
Take a seat like Chelmsford - the 202nd safest Conservative seat with a majority of 17,621 last time. The LDs run the council and strengthened their hold this year. With over 10,000 Labour votes to squeeze, could that be a surprise gain despite needing a 15.4% swing? I don't know but it's the kind of seat which could produce an upset if tactical voting is a potent enough force.
I saw a 24hr long play.
Move over time from EEA toward something else.
It had the “disadvantage” that it was a soft Brexit (in the old sense, ie it retained single market access), and that it didn’t have a clear timetable on it, thus open to criticism that was vulnerable to politically-driven stasis.
May’s Brexit was a kind of attempt to build a “hard” Flexcit, as she judged that immigration was the core reason behind Brexit and that any deal which retained FOM lacked legitimacy.
That was a terrible error, in my opinion, although you can understand the train of thought.
What’s done is done.
Britain will spend the next generation fixing it.
Important not to get carried away but that is the greatest win in our history.
https://twitter.com/Knox_Harrington/status/1695850505983938739
May's attempt to get her deal through was ludicrous. Putting exactly the same proposal through time and again was madness.
The hope of the second referendum having been dashed, and seeing what Johnson signed off as "oven-ready for the microwave" I might have had Bregret.
That's why she failed. There was a place to deliver a soft Brexit but it demanded strong political skills, which she didn't have.
He described it as a 'conscious uncoupling' from the EU via the EEC.
Her judgement was way off.
I was banned on evening before Huw Edwards outed himself when in hospital, only for one day like Leon. After few seconds bewilderment I had absolutely no problem with it. those just coming on that evening I posted Leon had been banned for posting a subtle Mabinogion quote, so don’t do the same thing.
🤦♀️
the site was full of why are people putting the site in danger, themselves in danger of being taken to court. So although I read everyday I kept away from the log in button.
My daddy can pay any court costs and fines, but I don’t want to take him there after all family grief of my brother to court for posting incel like things on social media - he was going through a phase when he thought he was an historic Templar and should run the country like they did. I am posting lot less replies now and carefully considering each post for two minutes now before posting. Like Lord Percy carefully considered it when given the choice to shut up, or have his head cut off didn’t offer a hasty reply. Sensible.
Although PB argues over degree the site is threatened of litigation or the bad individual who posts something is, there is another important element. I absolutely appreciate why social media sites need to be careful at times like that, not only a threat of litigation, loss of revenue and advertisers etc, it’s also about having to do the right thing by people in this world who haven’t even done anything and get caught up in witch hunts and smears - it’s about being a socially responsible (social) media. And with limited number of admins to police postings it’s a difficult task, the fair ask has to be for all members with posting rights in a community, to be careful and to be decent and responsible people, and police themself effectively. If we are good people, we shouldn’t even need to be advised or warned of a duty of care to the site and to people everywhere.
I clearly got a blind spot at this sort of thing, I try not to be an offender at all and engage patiently and politely and in good humour, but I am a repeat PB posting offender with lots of bans! I don’t have Twitter, banning me proves it’s flipping good I never attempted Twitter or social media as I would not know when to ban myself.
That would have concentrated minds, on all sides, of what kind of Brexit was best,
and not let any Remainer hopes of blocking Brexit surface.
Labour are particularly useless and Starmer in particular, utterly inept. Nonetheless your analysis is absurd. In a nutshell Labour posturing made Boris do a big bad Brexit, it was all Labour's fault. Labour own Brexit! If I had been an MP in the Parliament of shame, I would have voted down May's deal. It was rubbish. It…
The highlighted part made it obvious that the following sentence was being made sarcastically. You helpfully cut that bit out when you replied.
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/profile/4161/MoonRabbit
And embarrassed.
And a bit frightened next social media mess up lands my family back in court. Tbh.
There should be a law against it. Policed by banning.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnmjP_wAAEM
She was not up to it. I'm not sure who might have been, but it's not like many were even putting themselves forward for the task.
Take the latest YouGov (19% Lab lead) and apply UNS to your example of Chelmsford. You get:
Con 37.2%
Lab 30.1%
LD 23.3%
There is certainly scope for anti-Conservative tactical voting but those figures make a case for LD not Labour voters switching tactically. The boundary review will complicate things further, of course.
https://twitter.com/nexta_tv/status/1695855772247232569
elenskyy gave a big interview to journalist Natalia Moseychuk. Main statements:
- We are ready to fight for a long time if we will not lose people. Minimizing casualties. Like, for example, Israel. We can live like this.
- I do not think it is right to transfer hostilities to the territory of Russia. There is a great risk that in such a case we will be left alone.
- If we are on the administrative border with Crimea, I think we can politically to push for the demilitarization of Russia on the territory of the peninsula. I think it would be better. Better, first of all, for those who would carry it out. Any war is still casualties, no matter where it is.
- Ukraine needs to grow up and know that at one point or another Ukraine may be alone. Some of the partners may break away at one moment.
- Many debts during this war, I am sure, will be restructured, but there will be no gifts.
- I have set a task, lawmakers will be asked to equate corruption with treason for the duration of the war. I realize that this cannot be in effect permanently, but for wartime, I think it will help.
- I don't want people to have the attitude of holding on to power. I'm not holding on to anything. I would like to hold elections.
- For me, as a president, it is important to have a victory that would make it impossible for the fighting to return. And that the people remain united.
And none in a good way.
Had Labour - or sufficient Labour MPs - wanted to force a soft Brexit, they could have done. But they chose not to. They gambled that dicking about for long enough would see something turn up.
Personally, I'm moderately happy about it. My view is the Brexit we got is better than what May negotiated or what a Labour Brexit might have been. But the opportunity for a soft Brexit or a BRINO was there, if Remainer MPs hadn't been so pig headed.
The only person with the dexterity, verve and shamelessness to pull it off was Boris. At what point did he become too tied to the maximum freedom / "divorce with ongoing sex" strand of Brexit to steer the UK into some version of an EEA relationship?
You may declare that I am bound to say that but I have never known such dislike of a governing party in this country in my life.
I suspect the Conservatives are in for an absolute mauling.
What the “tactical voting” in our FPTP system is, it’s the centre ground of UK choosing which of Conservative or Labour to put in power. So I argue the last 15 years have seen much anti Labour tactical voting that has kept the Conservatives in, and Labour, particularly Corbyn Labour UK centre ground didn’t like at all, out.
"Or we can do what the Conservatives traditionally do and that is put our hospitals, police and our health service at risk."
Gordon Brown in 2010 was correct.
No doubt speaking (at first instance anyhow) of the Sage of Mar-a-Lardo and fellow Grifters-On-Parade.
I am glad you like your Brexit.
(Well, you said I might.)
No I haven’t got a mini one. For one thing just one might miss pig company on its own, so it needs two as they are social creatures, and an inner city flat doesn’t give it enough required snouting around undergrowth or mud it will need everyday. It would get more than enough cuddles and tummy rubs, but not enough of the outside to satisfy its natural instincts. If that makes any sense.
Both Lenin and Trotsky believed in the kind of “democracy” where the people were told what to do by the right leaders. And none of that multi party voting nonesense.
Trotsky, dissolving the Constituent Assembly in January 1918. Elected in perhaps the only democratic election ever held in Russia.
“Let’s trigger an irrevocable international agreement with no plan, and let’s do it quickly before anyone can stop us”.
Edit - I suppose technically a case could be made that Wellington had not been an official Cabinet minister, but as Master General of the Ordnance and Commander in Chief of the Army he had in effect been a member of the cabinet and certainly he was politically very important to the Liverpool government.
It sounds like one of those takes that the nature of Lenin and Trotsky's preferred methods was a difference of kind from Stalin, rather than a difference of degree, which personally I would describe as charitably generous.
But you are right in what I am currently expecting on election night is Labour 38, Con 28, LibDem 17, even if none of the opinion polls ever say this, so a blue wall bloodbath for the Tories like it was in 2023 local elections. And my reasoning is, I don’t think voters give pollsters their honest tactical voting intention, or surely not waiting till the general election campaign to have an idea what that is? 🤷♀️
In the style of those funky puzzles published by "quality" rags in UK, the Fourth name is famous in the early history of US motor racing.
Hint - as name of county in one of the Carolinas famed, first for running moonshine, then (by natural progression) for stock car racing.
From 1996:
Satisfied with government: 13 - 22 percent
Dissatisfied with government: 69 - 78 percent
Satisfied with John Major: 25 - 36 percent
Dissatisfied with John Major: 55 - 66 percent
From 2023:
Satisfied with government: 12 - 14 percent
Dissatisfied with government: 76 - 80 percent
Satisfied with Rishi Sunak: 26 - 32 percent
Dissatisfied with Rishi Sunak: 54 - 63 percent
Not much in it, really. Major and his government were doing even worse around 1994, and clawed back a bit of reputation after that. But however you look at it, the government is pretty damn unpopular.
Many factors contributed to the Soviet Union's downfall. They include defeat in Afghanistan, an unsustainable arms race, financial bankruptcy, laggardly technology, sclerotic political structures, a discredited ideology, a generation gap between rulers and ruled, and much else besides; discussion of them fills any number of weighty tomes, but none in itself gives a sufficient explanation.
The essence lies deeper, and is not complicated. The Soviet System was built on extreme force and extreme fraud. Practically everything that Lenin and the Leninists did was accompanied by killing; practically everything they said was based on half-baked theories, a total lack of integrity and huge barefaced lies.
She instead says economic growth will have to fund public services. Starmer thus continues to dump the last elements of Corbynism from the Labour Party and shift it back towards a Blairite and New Labour agenda
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66634187
Labour rules out wealth tax if party wins next election
Sounds like Pornhub again.
But the only person who gets away with saying "look what you made me do" is Taylor Swift.