Netanyahus out of control war and scorched earth policy in Gaza now leading to American casualties and making us all less safe.
As much as I dislike him, the American casualties are not Bibi's fault.
The whole area is being de-stabilized. This didn’t happen in a vacuum .
No indeed. Hamas may have had something to do with it, for a start.
What American casualties are these? I haven't heard anything.
"There are conflicting accounts of the location of the drone attack which killed three US servicemen.
US President Joe Biden says the attack took place in north-east Jordan, close to the Syrian border, suggesting the location was a US base called Tower 22, which is just across the border from the much larger US base at al-Tanf, in south-east Syria."
The extent to which he can be blamed is debatable, but Biden does risk looking like a very weak President going into the election.
Yes. He could lose the election right here, right now, tonight
Iran has just hit US troops directly, and killed several and wounded many
Is America a superpower or not? Does it just meekly accept this, or does it take on the mad mullahs in Tehran?
If Biden fails, then Trump will exult and taunt, and Trump will have a point. America was not humiliated when Trump was in charge. It’s an unfair point, to an extent, but it will work
No it hasn't. It's hit them *indirectly.* Which is rather different, and altogether more difficult to respond to.
As for Trump, he'll probably claim they were attacked by Iraq and China and this shows that President Obama is unfit to be re-elected.
Iran has significant ballistic missile capability, which improves daily, and is apparently months from a nuke
Can America/Israel tolerate a world where Iran has nukes with missiles able to destroy Tel Aviv? And, eventually, NYC? Perhaps they can, perhaps they have no choice
But this potential war would be a way of setting back Iran a decade, and hoping that America’s technological lead in AI means Iran can never be a serious threat again (for the foreseeable)
I don't think that any PM would use longevity as a tool for choosing the GE date.... to me that just isn't a serious analysis. 🤷
It's a bit of fun for a Sunday afternoon, sure.
Though I wonder if the long campaign after Boris's departure was so he could sneak above May in the list.
The only relevant question once a PM enters the final year is "If I call an election now, am I confident of winning?" If so, call it, if not wait- even if the situation is likely to worsen.
Hence December 19th, on the basis that even Today's Conservative Party aren't dumb enough to call an election where the campaign will have a Christmas break
Okay, just a bit of fun on a Sunday afternoon. I apologise for being grumpy.
Though another fun header can be the very opposite, can’t it, about political history without self serving clinging on. through such black mirrors we could be even closer to the actual considerations going on, maybe?
Lord Finkelstein, who advised John Major, has argued 97 was a heavier defeat for hanging on till the bitter end. Learning from history, what can you see in those remaining months that can lead to worse or better results for your party? MarqueeMark seemed to agree with this, Dura Ace and Peter the Punter actually believes Sunak doesn’t care how many seats he leaves the Conservatives with?
The current Spanish government called one early whilst behind in polls, did that surprise you? they had seemed like moving towards end of their time in power, yet did better than expected, the result surprise you? What if they had waited - like everyone always does, apparently?
Now the what if. what if previous UK governments hadn’t waited, but called those elections that never were? Autumn 2007? Autumn 1978? and it worked for them like it did in Spain last year? Better results for the government, maybe leading to different political history altogether, like Lady Thatcher never became Primeminister at all?
what is the science and reason to waiting every single time? Or, instead, looking into the remaining months, what do you see there specifically to help you have a great campaign - for a government it’s getting attention off yourself and onto your opponents, the threat of the new, tap into the universal truth: who really wants change when it’s not absolutely necessary?
I’m sure the timing in leaders minds, and in the team around them, is based on how can we have great campaign.
At least it should be?
There's an interesting comparison to 2007 in that the best option for the party, and with a chance of winning, wasn't taken as it posed too much risk to the principal. The fact that Brown should have (and maybe initially planned to) have a short, sharp launch and go within six months in the honeymoon period, but bottled it, has become legion.
If Sunak had actually done that. Come in after Truss. Clear the decks. Promote fresh faces, apologise for Truss and try to fix the most obvious things while doing a policy blitz, putting together his manifesto, and going to the country within 6 months, he might have pulled something out of the bag. As it is, like Brown, it's now all bad options.
In both cases you have to think one reason that road wasn't taken is due to the personal risk (pretty large in Sunak's case) that the person in charge would be humiliated by losing after 6 months as PM. While going on for 2 years or so proved the worst of all worlds, as it's not long enough to properly fix anything but long enough for people to remember you're not this new face with new ideas, and blame you for said problems.
Sunak could plausibly have made it a post-covid election and tried to contrast his safe pair of hands approach with Starmer's reckless grandstanding.
Yes that could well have worked. But it would have required Starmer to play ball and do some reckless grandstanding.
Such a short memory, as I know only too well
‘Johnson Variant’, what a prat
What a tw@.
That's your next PM, right there.
For those who think they will get something better than Rishi Sunak. Spoiler alert...
Netanyahus out of control war and scorched earth policy in Gaza now leading to American casualties and making us all less safe.
As much as I dislike him, the American casualties are not Bibi's fault.
The whole area is being de-stabilized. This didn’t happen in a vacuum .
No indeed. Hamas may have had something to do with it, for a start.
What American casualties are these? I haven't heard anything.
"There are conflicting accounts of the location of the drone attack which killed three US servicemen.
US President Joe Biden says the attack took place in north-east Jordan, close to the Syrian border, suggesting the location was a US base called Tower 22, which is just across the border from the much larger US base at al-Tanf, in south-east Syria."
The extent to which he can be blamed is debatable, but Biden does risk looking like a very weak President going into the election.
Yes. He could lose the election right here, right now, tonight
Iran has just hit US troops directly, and killed several and wounded many
Is America a superpower or not? Does it just meekly accept this, or does it take on the mad mullahs in Tehran?
If Biden fails, then Trump will exult and taunt, and Trump will have a point. America was not humiliated when Trump was in charge. It’s an unfair point, to an extent, but it will work
It hasn’t hit them directly. It’s hit them through proxies. Hitting back will certainly happen, Biden’s said so and he’s not so impaired as to not back that up, but whatever is done won’t be enough for the armchair generals of the right who care less about the efficacy of military action than it producing a pointless but visually spectacular bloodbath.
I don't think that any PM would use longevity as a tool for choosing the GE date.... to me that just isn't a serious analysis. 🤷
It's a bit of fun for a Sunday afternoon, sure.
Though I wonder if the long campaign after Boris's departure was so he could sneak above May in the list.
The only relevant question once a PM enters the final year is "If I call an election now, am I confident of winning?" If so, call it, if not wait- even if the situation is likely to worsen.
Hence December 19th, on the basis that even Today's Conservative Party aren't dumb enough to call an election where the campaign will have a Christmas break
Okay, just a bit of fun on a Sunday afternoon. I apologise for being grumpy.
Though another fun header can be the very opposite, can’t it, about political history without self serving clinging on. through such black mirrors we could be even closer to the actual considerations going on, maybe?
Lord Finkelstein, who advised John Major, has argued 97 was a heavier defeat for hanging on till the bitter end. Learning from history, what can you see in those remaining months that can lead to worse or better results for your party? MarqueeMark seemed to agree with this, Dura Ace and Peter the Punter actually believes Sunak doesn’t care how many seats he leaves the Conservatives with?
The current Spanish government called one early whilst behind in polls, did that surprise you? they had seemed like moving towards end of their time in power, yet did better than expected, the result surprise you? What if they had waited - like everyone always does, apparently?
Now the what if. what if previous UK governments hadn’t waited, but called those elections that never were? Autumn 2007? Autumn 1978? and it worked for them like it did in Spain last year? Better results for the government, maybe leading to different political history altogether, like Lady Thatcher never became Primeminister at all?
what is the science and reason to waiting every single time? Or, instead, looking into the remaining months, what do you see there specifically to help you have a great campaign - for a government it’s getting attention off yourself and onto your opponents, the threat of the new, tap into the universal truth: who really wants change when it’s not absolutely necessary?
I’m sure the timing in leaders minds, and in the team around them, is based on how can we have great campaign.
At least it should be?
There's an interesting comparison to 2007 in that the best option for the party, and with a chance of winning, wasn't taken as it posed too much risk to the principal. The fact that Brown should have (and maybe initially planned to) have a short, sharp launch and go within six months in the honeymoon period, but bottled it, has become legion.
If Sunak had actually done that. Come in after Truss. Clear the decks. Promote fresh faces, apologise for Truss and try to fix the most obvious things while doing a policy blitz, putting together his manifesto, and going to the country within 6 months, he might have pulled something out of the bag. As it is, like Brown, it's now all bad options.
In both cases you have to think one reason that road wasn't taken is due to the personal risk (pretty large in Sunak's case) that the person in charge would be humiliated by losing after 6 months as PM. While going on for 2 years or so proved the worst of all worlds, as it's not long enough to properly fix anything but long enough for people to remember you're not this new face with new ideas, and blame you for said problems.
Sunak could plausibly have made it a post-covid election and tried to contrast his safe pair of hands approach with Starmer's reckless grandstanding.
Yes that could well have worked. But it would have required Starmer to play ball and do some reckless grandstanding.
Such a short memory, as I know only too well
‘Johnson Variant’, what a prat
What a tw@.
That's your next PM, right there.
For those who think they will get something better than Rishi Sunak. Spoiler alert...
The entire Labour program for government looks suspiciously like continuity Sunak. No, that's not quite accurate. Continuity Sunak minus the Rwanda policy. Beyond that, not a cigarette paper to put between the sides. Just endless repetition of the formula that there is no money because taxing anyone with assets would make them cry.
The failure of such an administration is a nailed on certainty, after which we get Kemi if we're lucky, Suella if we ain't.
The Oklahoma Republican party passed a "censure" resolution condemning their GOP Sen. James Lankford for the "crime" of ignoring Trump's orders and working with Democrats on a bill that would dramatically increase security at the border:
"Until Senator Lankford ceases from these actions, the Oklahoma Republican Party will cease all support for him,” the resolution states
Netanyahus out of control war and scorched earth policy in Gaza now leading to American casualties and making us all less safe.
As much as I dislike him, the American casualties are not Bibi's fault.
The whole area is being de-stabilized. This didn’t happen in a vacuum .
No indeed. Hamas may have had something to do with it, for a start.
What American casualties are these? I haven't heard anything.
"There are conflicting accounts of the location of the drone attack which killed three US servicemen.
US President Joe Biden says the attack took place in north-east Jordan, close to the Syrian border, suggesting the location was a US base called Tower 22, which is just across the border from the much larger US base at al-Tanf, in south-east Syria."
The extent to which he can be blamed is debatable, but Biden does risk looking like a very weak President going into the election.
Yes. He could lose the election right here, right now, tonight
Iran has just hit US troops directly, and killed several and wounded many
Is America a superpower or not? Does it just meekly accept this, or does it take on the mad mullahs in Tehran?
If Biden fails, then Trump will exult and taunt, and Trump will have a point. America was not humiliated when Trump was in charge. It’s an unfair point, to an extent, but it will work
It hasn’t hit them directly. It’s hit them through proxies. Hitting back will certainly happen, Biden’s said so and he’s not so impaired as to not back that up, but whatever is done won’t be enough for the armchair generals of the right who care less about the efficacy of military action than it producing a pointless but visually spectacular bloodbath.
TBH I think the US Right cares more about defeating a weak “Jimmy Carterish” Biden in November. And the US Left feels the same about defeating a mad “war mongering” Trump
This is all poisoned by the US electoral cycle, and seeing which narrative prevails
I reckon Biden will have to hit Iran directly, somehow
Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't,
Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.
Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.
Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.
I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.
We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.
Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.
Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
Past performance doesn't predict future performance, as any fule kno!
Polling for Tories (and Reform too if you add them in) is pisspoor below the age of 50 and you are doing less than zero about it.
Indeed, the problem for the Tories isn't that they are doing badly among the Under 50s, it's that they are doing catastrophically badly. Comically badly. They aren't just unpopular, to all intents and purposes, outside a few oddballs, those who expect to remain in the workforce for 20 years or more have stopped voting Tory almost altogether.
Sure, that should improve in opposition as general polling improves and they recalibrate - but to the level of health where previously won? They have been so bad for and elicit such anger among the Under 40s in particular that the shift maybe generational and permanent - a cohort which won't forgive or forget.
Plus, there are little signs the Tory party is capable of coming to terms with this and why they are despised. There's the odd noise from outsiders about housebuilding. Which would be welcome, but one thing among many, and something Labour should find it much easier to outbid them on. Similar for infrastructure.
To take Brexit as an example. It's not going to define how opponents (the vast majority of the young as they were in 2016) vote forever or even now. But it's going to be very difficult to persuade people to give you a chance if they believe your signature achievement, the one the Conservative Party now defines itself by, was a terrible error that created chaos and made them poorer.
"Don't let them back in or they'll ruin Britain like they did last time" is going to be a powerful and persuasive argument to be used against the Tories for a very long time. And one that simple demographics will cement, given those who have been infuriated by and made poorer by the Tories are younger than those they have protected and enriched.
I think there are two different things going on and it is a mistake to conflate them
The cohort that is 40-50 were becoming politically aware during the fag-end of Major’s government /Blair’s prime. That fixed their political views (non-Tory) in the way that the Winter of Discontent did and, possibly Brexit will (too early to say)
Sub-40 I think it’s more about economics - this cohort don’t have an economic stake (housing) and so less to conserve plus social attitudes have evolved fast and the Tories have not (in part) kept up.
But of course it's not just that. Otherwise those who had done well for themselves would still vote Tory. And I can tell you they very much aren't. I have friends who own places in London on v high salaries who are more anti-Tory than I am.
It's a deadly combination of the economics, public services seen as declining, Brexit being seen as a bad move, being reactionary on social issues (people often find 'wokeness' tiresome but asked to choose between that and the likes of Lee Anderson, there's only one winner), and generally being a bit of a joke with the chaos. It's become axiomatic that this has been a terrible government in multiple ways. Some of which the Tories will never have a mea culpa for or a reckoning with as they have become part of Tory dogma and identity.
Obviously there are slight differences as you go through age groups - the very young are more socially conscious but arguably more entrepreneurial (or venal) for instance. But in general the point is simple. It's cohorts that have spent most of their working lives under these last few Tory governments, and view them as having repeatedly made decisions that now regard as harmful to them and terrible for the country - even if they didn't view them as that initially.
That's going to be a very difficult perception to reverse. Especially when you're precluded from making the biggest gestures that would show you're a changed party.
That’s a very good post. Especially the overview of why this government has blown it with so many voters.
Everyone can see that the country is broken; nothing works any more. Which is why the Tories’ talking about future tax cuts or abolishing IHT misses the target entirely. Especially after a decade when they’ve penalised those working, both rich and poor, to support the elderly and economically inactive.
The LibDems’ increasing obsession with what I regard as fringe social issues was a secondary factor behind my deciding no longer to be a member. But Casino’s Meldrew-tribute-act on here made me realise that, if it really has to be a binary choice (the sensible middle way of course being the best course of action), it is better to be on the right side of history rather than join Casino and his mini-me Leon in sticking up for the Neanderthals.
It is becoming hard to see what pitch the Tories can make in GE24 that won’t be met with guffaws of incredulity?
As a potential voter the Govt has blown it with, I also think those are a couple of very interesting posts.
I became somewhat politically and in conscious at an early age - about late-70s early-Thatcher. Partly through going to sleep with the radio playing from the age of about 11 (remember Radio Newsreel?), including World Service and sometimes even the foreign service of Radio Moscow.
One very formative experience for me was difficulty in getting to school because Arthur Scargill sent his mob of perhaps 1000-2000 flying thugs down the motorway to intimidate Nottinghamshire workers at Badminton Colliery. I suggest subsequent events including Scargill's campaign to make the NUM subsidise his lifestyle of the rich, and the looting of NUM Funds by a certain MP justify that evaluation (no names for OGH's sake), confirm that he was always a bad 'un - yet I find a belief in some that that behaviour was somehow OK.
I am always reluctant to vote for a party with TU affiliation, because imo politically-driven TUs in the UK are poisonous - and I can point at plenty of examples even after the TU reforms we have had, starting with McClusky and his cabal. I think I have perhaps only voted for Labour twice since - eg Gloria de Piero in 2015. But then much of the time I have only been offered a clown and a deadbeat as candidates, in Dennis Skinner and Geoff Hoon.
I don't buy the thing about "younger generations being more socially conscious" - I think that is a self-delusion that does not stand the test of history, and varies by area of society; I think it's fair to call society more individualistic now, and I am not sure either about "more environmentally conscious". It was the post-hippy or hippy-turned-practical generation that did the hard yards on much of that, and every UK Govt since 1990 that has been seriously building foundations for a greener future. Until Sunak & the current Tory leadership started burning it all down to save his butt.
Nor do I buy the thing about penalising working people to support pensioners, since pensioners have not had significant support - but perhaps I know more pensioners living on the basic pension than others here.
Current Tories? I am at the point of saying that I will never again vote Conservative, which is what I will tell Lee Anderson or his representative should they knock on my door. Translated into practice that is likely to mean 15-20 years (ie current generation of Tories), which is how long that type of resolution tends to last with me.
My reasons for that stance are their lost moral compass plus inability to govern competently in a post-Brexit environment. I'm still happy to support Brexit, as my main motivation is being outside the horrors of EU politics. I'd support single market without being subsumed by the political structures.
So my vote is available for Labour next time, dependent on getting a sane candidate. None has been appointed for Ashfield yet.
I assume you mean Babbington Colliery not Badminton - Babbington Colliery was just off the M1 on the A610 - It's now Phoenix Park site of the Nottingham Tram. Agree entirely with your voting intentions - Tories have lost my vote cos they are incompetent/stupid whilst Labour have lost it due to Brexit Referendum 2. Lib Dems no chance. I will vote Reform if Nigel takes over otherwise Green or No Vote. I know a lot of former Tory voters like you or me. FWIW I think Lee Anderson will retain his seat.
Yes - Babbington. The dual carriageways were full of flying pickets on that day.
On Lee Anderson, I'd say that Ben Bradley is safer. So if Anderson survives, so will Bradley imo.
I really can't call Ashfield as I can't call the Ashfield Independents. Despite all the slings and arrows, they increased their seats at the last Local Elections. Some of their supporters are extraordinarily loyal.
Two factors are that there has been a lot of housing built in both Ashfield and Mansfield over recent yeas, and both are becoming to some extent commuter towns for Nottingham more than previously (via Robin Hood line light rai partially).
I would not consider Hucknall (southern end of Ashfield Constituency) to be a Nottingham suburb since they are also on the tramway network. Nottingham centric people voting in Ashfield. It is noticeable that house prices there have relatively increased by perhaps 10%+ over a period of years compared to similar housing stick *not* on the tram network.
A third factor is that our District Hospital (Mansfield / Ashfield borders) is now 600 beds and has 3000+ staff, which would probably mainly go against Conservative this time. Many live locally (inexpensive housing), but a small but not tiny number of staff I met whilst in there for 3 weeks last summer commute quite some distance to work there - I met ones coming from both Nottingham and Sheffield.
Hi, Agree entirely with Ben Bradley - he used to be my local County Councillor - why voters are loyal to Ashfield Independents puzzles me as well I honestly thought their period of rule would bring them down. I think Nottingham City Council consider Hucknall to be in their area of influence as to be honest so do I,I live in Hucknall so my MP is Mark Spencer so difficult to call.
Netanyahus out of control war and scorched earth policy in Gaza now leading to American casualties and making us all less safe.
As much as I dislike him, the American casualties are not Bibi's fault.
The whole area is being de-stabilized. This didn’t happen in a vacuum .
No indeed. Hamas may have had something to do with it, for a start.
What American casualties are these? I haven't heard anything.
"There are conflicting accounts of the location of the drone attack which killed three US servicemen.
US President Joe Biden says the attack took place in north-east Jordan, close to the Syrian border, suggesting the location was a US base called Tower 22, which is just across the border from the much larger US base at al-Tanf, in south-east Syria."
The extent to which he can be blamed is debatable, but Biden does risk looking like a very weak President going into the election.
Yes. He could lose the election right here, right now, tonight
Iran has just hit US troops directly, and killed several and wounded many
Is America a superpower or not? Does it just meekly accept this, or does it take on the mad mullahs in Tehran?
If Biden fails, then Trump will exult and taunt, and Trump will have a point. America was not humiliated when Trump was in charge. It’s an unfair point, to an extent, but it will work
No it hasn't. It's hit them *indirectly.* Which is rather different, and altogether more difficult to respond to.
As for Trump, he'll probably claim they were attacked by Iraq and China and this shows that President Obama is unfit to be re-elected.
Iran has significant ballistic missile capability, which improves daily, and is apparently months from a nuke
Can America/Israel tolerate a world where Iran has nukes with missiles able to destroy Tel Aviv? And, eventually, NYC? Perhaps they can, perhaps they have no choice
But this potential war would be a way of setting back Iran a decade, and hoping that America’s technological lead in AI means Iran can never be a serious threat again (for the foreseeable)
Just today, Iran has put three satellites into orbit.
I don't think that any PM would use longevity as a tool for choosing the GE date.... to me that just isn't a serious analysis. 🤷
It's a bit of fun for a Sunday afternoon, sure.
Though I wonder if the long campaign after Boris's departure was so he could sneak above May in the list.
The only relevant question once a PM enters the final year is "If I call an election now, am I confident of winning?" If so, call it, if not wait- even if the situation is likely to worsen.
Hence December 19th, on the basis that even Today's Conservative Party aren't dumb enough to call an election where the campaign will have a Christmas break
Okay, just a bit of fun on a Sunday afternoon. I apologise for being grumpy.
Though another fun header can be the very opposite, can’t it, about political history without self serving clinging on. through such black mirrors we could be even closer to the actual considerations going on, maybe?
Lord Finkelstein, who advised John Major, has argued 97 was a heavier defeat for hanging on till the bitter end. Learning from history, what can you see in those remaining months that can lead to worse or better results for your party? MarqueeMark seemed to agree with this, Dura Ace and Peter the Punter actually believes Sunak doesn’t care how many seats he leaves the Conservatives with?
The current Spanish government called one early whilst behind in polls, did that surprise you? they had seemed like moving towards end of their time in power, yet did better than expected, the result surprise you? What if they had waited - like everyone always does, apparently?
Now the what if. what if previous UK governments hadn’t waited, but called those elections that never were? Autumn 2007? Autumn 1978? and it worked for them like it did in Spain last year? Better results for the government, maybe leading to different political history altogether, like Lady Thatcher never became Primeminister at all?
what is the science and reason to waiting every single time? Or, instead, looking into the remaining months, what do you see there specifically to help you have a great campaign - for a government it’s getting attention off yourself and onto your opponents, the threat of the new, tap into the universal truth: who really wants change when it’s not absolutely necessary?
I’m sure the timing in leaders minds, and in the team around them, is based on how can we have great campaign.
At least it should be?
There's an interesting comparison to 2007 in that the best option for the party, and with a chance of winning, wasn't taken as it posed too much risk to the principal. The fact that Brown should have (and maybe initially planned to) have a short, sharp launch and go within six months in the honeymoon period, but bottled it, has become legion.
If Sunak had actually done that. Come in after Truss. Clear the decks. Promote fresh faces, apologise for Truss and try to fix the most obvious things while doing a policy blitz, putting together his manifesto, and going to the country within 6 months, he might have pulled something out of the bag. As it is, like Brown, it's now all bad options.
In both cases you have to think one reason that road wasn't taken is due to the personal risk (pretty large in Sunak's case) that the person in charge would be humiliated by losing after 6 months as PM. While going on for 2 years or so proved the worst of all worlds, as it's not long enough to properly fix anything but long enough for people to remember you're not this new face with new ideas, and blame you for said problems.
Sunak could plausibly have made it a post-covid election and tried to contrast his safe pair of hands approach with Starmer's reckless grandstanding.
Yes that could well have worked. But it would have required Starmer to play ball and do some reckless grandstanding.
Such a short memory, as I know only too well
‘Johnson Variant’, what a prat
What a tw@.
That's your next PM, right there.
For those who think they will get something better than Rishi Sunak. Spoiler alert...
Quite incredible really, that the man who looks certain to be our next PM by virtue of being a sensible person with integrity, was calling for us to remain under restrictions solely so he could point the finger at his rival, who he had desperately named a relatively harmless new strain of Covid after
I don't think that any PM would use longevity as a tool for choosing the GE date.... to me that just isn't a serious analysis. 🤷
It's a bit of fun for a Sunday afternoon, sure.
Though I wonder if the long campaign after Boris's departure was so he could sneak above May in the list.
The only relevant question once a PM enters the final year is "If I call an election now, am I confident of winning?" If so, call it, if not wait- even if the situation is likely to worsen.
Hence December 19th, on the basis that even Today's Conservative Party aren't dumb enough to call an election where the campaign will have a Christmas break
Okay, just a bit of fun on a Sunday afternoon. I apologise for being grumpy.
Though another fun header can be the very opposite, can’t it, about political history without self serving clinging on. through such black mirrors we could be even closer to the actual considerations going on, maybe?
Lord Finkelstein, who advised John Major, has argued 97 was a heavier defeat for hanging on till the bitter end. Learning from history, what can you see in those remaining months that can lead to worse or better results for your party? MarqueeMark seemed to agree with this, Dura Ace and Peter the Punter actually believes Sunak doesn’t care how many seats he leaves the Conservatives with?
The current Spanish government called one early whilst behind in polls, did that surprise you? they had seemed like moving towards end of their time in power, yet did better than expected, the result surprise you? What if they had waited - like everyone always does, apparently?
Now the what if. what if previous UK governments hadn’t waited, but called those elections that never were? Autumn 2007? Autumn 1978? and it worked for them like it did in Spain last year? Better results for the government, maybe leading to different political history altogether, like Lady Thatcher never became Primeminister at all?
what is the science and reason to waiting every single time? Or, instead, looking into the remaining months, what do you see there specifically to help you have a great campaign - for a government it’s getting attention off yourself and onto your opponents, the threat of the new, tap into the universal truth: who really wants change when it’s not absolutely necessary?
I’m sure the timing in leaders minds, and in the team around them, is based on how can we have great campaign.
At least it should be?
There's an interesting comparison to 2007 in that the best option for the party, and with a chance of winning, wasn't taken as it posed too much risk to the principal. The fact that Brown should have (and maybe initially planned to) have a short, sharp launch and go within six months in the honeymoon period, but bottled it, has become legion.
If Sunak had actually done that. Come in after Truss. Clear the decks. Promote fresh faces, apologise for Truss and try to fix the most obvious things while doing a policy blitz, putting together his manifesto, and going to the country within 6 months, he might have pulled something out of the bag. As it is, like Brown, it's now all bad options.
In both cases you have to think one reason that road wasn't taken is due to the personal risk (pretty large in Sunak's case) that the person in charge would be humiliated by losing after 6 months as PM. While going on for 2 years or so proved the worst of all worlds, as it's not long enough to properly fix anything but long enough for people to remember you're not this new face with new ideas, and blame you for said problems.
Sunak could plausibly have made it a post-covid election and tried to contrast his safe pair of hands approach with Starmer's reckless grandstanding.
Yes that could well have worked. But it would have required Starmer to play ball and do some reckless grandstanding.
Such a short memory, as I know only too well
‘Johnson Variant’, what a prat
What a tw@.
That's your next PM, right there.
For those who think they will get something better than Rishi Sunak. Spoiler alert...
I think on average, if one is objective, Conservative MPs are slightly more capable than Labour ones. But the government is a shambles and Labour will be less of a shambles to start with. The reason is simply that after Corbyn the Labour party has pulled itself together, or at least papered over the cracks, whilst the Conservative Party is still riven by factionalism, and any leader has to choose his team like a medieval king, more by reference to their power bases than their ability.
Netanyahus out of control war and scorched earth policy in Gaza now leading to American casualties and making us all less safe.
As much as I dislike him, the American casualties are not Bibi's fault.
The whole area is being de-stabilized. This didn’t happen in a vacuum .
No indeed. Hamas may have had something to do with it, for a start.
What American casualties are these? I haven't heard anything.
"There are conflicting accounts of the location of the drone attack which killed three US servicemen.
US President Joe Biden says the attack took place in north-east Jordan, close to the Syrian border, suggesting the location was a US base called Tower 22, which is just across the border from the much larger US base at al-Tanf, in south-east Syria."
The extent to which he can be blamed is debatable, but Biden does risk looking like a very weak President going into the election.
Yes. He could lose the election right here, right now, tonight
Iran has just hit US troops directly, and killed several and wounded many
Is America a superpower or not? Does it just meekly accept this, or does it take on the mad mullahs in Tehran?
If Biden fails, then Trump will exult and taunt, and Trump will have a point. America was not humiliated when Trump was in charge. It’s an unfair point, to an extent, but it will work
No it hasn't. It's hit them *indirectly.* Which is rather different, and altogether more difficult to respond to.
As for Trump, he'll probably claim they were attacked by Iraq and China and this shows that President Obama is unfit to be re-elected.
Iran has significant ballistic missile capability, which improves daily, and is apparently months from a nuke
Can America/Israel tolerate a world where Iran has nukes with missiles able to destroy Tel Aviv? And, eventually, NYC? Perhaps they can, perhaps they have no choice
But this potential war would be a way of setting back Iran a decade, and hoping that America’s technological lead in AI means Iran can never be a serious threat again (for the foreseeable)
Why would anyone hang on in this situation, just to climb this leaderboard? Isn’t that the biggest insult, to suggest their motivation here is themself, not party or country? Surely this sort of talk is for fiction books, not reality?
The only thought on Sunak’s mind and the team of highly paid professionals and scientists around him, is to get the best possible election result from this year and situation.They know the only thing that can possibly do this is to win the battle of the campaigns. Picking the most favourable backdrop of news narrative to campaign in front of is not only top most consideration on the list, it is the only consideration on the list, this longest serving lead table 100% does not come into it.
Do you actually believe this? Do lefty PBers really think Sunak and Tories think in this fictitious way? Are you placing bets believing this?
I don't think that any PM would use longevity as a tool for choosing the GE date.... to me that just isn't a serious analysis. 🤷
It's a bit of fun for a Sunday afternoon, sure.
Though I wonder if the long campaign after Boris's departure was so he could sneak above May in the list.
The only relevant question once a PM enters the final year is "If I call an election now, am I confident of winning?" If so, call it, if not wait- even if the situation is likely to worsen.
Hence December 19th, on the basis that even Today's Conservative Party aren't dumb enough to call an election where the campaign will have a Christmas break
Okay, just a bit of fun on a Sunday afternoon. I apologise for being grumpy.
Though another fun header can be the very opposite, can’t it, about political history without self serving clinging on. through such black mirrors we could be even closer to the actual considerations going on, maybe?
Lord Finkelstein, who advised John Major, has argued 97 was a heavier defeat for hanging on till the bitter end. Learning from history, what can you see in those remaining months that can lead to worse or better results for your party? MarqueeMark seemed to agree with this, Dura Ace and Peter the Punter actually believes Sunak doesn’t care how many seats he leaves the Conservatives with?
The current Spanish government called one early whilst behind in polls, did that surprise you? they had seemed like moving towards end of their time in power, yet did better than expected, the result surprise you? What if they had waited - like everyone always does, apparently?
Now the what if. what if previous UK governments hadn’t waited, but called those elections that never were? Autumn 2007? Autumn 1978? and it worked for them like it did in Spain last year? Better results for the government, maybe leading to different political history altogether, like Lady Thatcher never became Primeminister at all?
what is the science and reason to waiting every single time? Or, instead, looking into the remaining months, what do you see there specifically to help you have a great campaign - for a government it’s getting attention off yourself and onto your opponents, the threat of the new, tap into the universal truth: who really wants change when it’s not absolutely necessary?
I’m sure the timing in leaders minds, and in the team around them, is based on how can we have great campaign.
At least it should be?
There's an interesting comparison to 2007 in that the best option for the party, and with a chance of winning, wasn't taken as it posed too much risk to the principal. The fact that Brown should have (and maybe initially planned to) have a short, sharp launch and go within six months in the honeymoon period, but bottled it, has become legion.
If Sunak had actually done that. Come in after Truss. Clear the decks. Promote fresh faces, apologise for Truss and try to fix the most obvious things while doing a policy blitz, putting together his manifesto, and going to the country within 6 months, he might have pulled something out of the bag. As it is, like Brown, it's now all bad options.
In both cases you have to think one reason that road wasn't taken is due to the personal risk (pretty large in Sunak's case) that the person in charge would be humiliated by losing after 6 months as PM. While going on for 2 years or so proved the worst of all worlds, as it's not long enough to properly fix anything but long enough for people to remember you're not this new face with new ideas, and blame you for said problems.
Sunak could plausibly have made it a post-covid election and tried to contrast his safe pair of hands approach with Starmer's reckless grandstanding.
Yes that could well have worked. But it would have required Starmer to play ball and do some reckless grandstanding.
Such a short memory, as I know only too well
‘Johnson Variant’, what a prat
What a tw@.
That's your next PM, right there.
For those who think they will get something better than Rishi Sunak. Spoiler alert...
Quite incredible really, that the man who looks certain to be our next PM by virtue of being a sensible person with integrity, was calling for us to remain under restrictions solely so he could point the finger at his rival, who he had desperately named a relatively harmless new strain of Covid after
Starmer is a shameless liar and a hypocrite, he is also deeply Woke, inert and unimaginative. On the upside he is definitely quite smart, hugely ambitious and fairly ruthless (one has to admire how he brutally purged the Labour Left)
I don’t think it will be enough, given the problems we face. I suspect he will be a grave disappointment as PM, albeit not as bad as, say, Truss. More like TMay
The Oklahoma Republican party passed a "censure" resolution condemning their GOP Sen. James Lankford for the "crime" of ignoring Trump's orders and working with Democrats on a bill that would dramatically increase security at the border:
"Until Senator Lankford ceases from these actions, the Oklahoma Republican Party will cease all support for him,” the resolution states
Certainly is a cult. And unless US indie voters turn out in their droves in swing states in November and stop him, the cult will be running America for a very long time.
I don't think that any PM would use longevity as a tool for choosing the GE date.... to me that just isn't a serious analysis. 🤷
It's a bit of fun for a Sunday afternoon, sure.
Though I wonder if the long campaign after Boris's departure was so he could sneak above May in the list.
The only relevant question once a PM enters the final year is "If I call an election now, am I confident of winning?" If so, call it, if not wait- even if the situation is likely to worsen.
Hence December 19th, on the basis that even Today's Conservative Party aren't dumb enough to call an election where the campaign will have a Christmas break
Okay, just a bit of fun on a Sunday afternoon. I apologise for being grumpy.
Though another fun header can be the very opposite, can’t it, about political history without self serving clinging on. through such black mirrors we could be even closer to the actual considerations going on, maybe?
Lord Finkelstein, who advised John Major, has argued 97 was a heavier defeat for hanging on till the bitter end. Learning from history, what can you see in those remaining months that can lead to worse or better results for your party? MarqueeMark seemed to agree with this, Dura Ace and Peter the Punter actually believes Sunak doesn’t care how many seats he leaves the Conservatives with?
The current Spanish government called one early whilst behind in polls, did that surprise you? they had seemed like moving towards end of their time in power, yet did better than expected, the result surprise you? What if they had waited - like everyone always does, apparently?
Now the what if. what if previous UK governments hadn’t waited, but called those elections that never were? Autumn 2007? Autumn 1978? and it worked for them like it did in Spain last year? Better results for the government, maybe leading to different political history altogether, like Lady Thatcher never became Primeminister at all?
what is the science and reason to waiting every single time? Or, instead, looking into the remaining months, what do you see there specifically to help you have a great campaign - for a government it’s getting attention off yourself and onto your opponents, the threat of the new, tap into the universal truth: who really wants change when it’s not absolutely necessary?
I’m sure the timing in leaders minds, and in the team around them, is based on how can we have great campaign.
At least it should be?
There's an interesting comparison to 2007 in that the best option for the party, and with a chance of winning, wasn't taken as it posed too much risk to the principal. The fact that Brown should have (and maybe initially planned to) have a short, sharp launch and go within six months in the honeymoon period, but bottled it, has become legion.
If Sunak had actually done that. Come in after Truss. Clear the decks. Promote fresh faces, apologise for Truss and try to fix the most obvious things while doing a policy blitz, putting together his manifesto, and going to the country within 6 months, he might have pulled something out of the bag. As it is, like Brown, it's now all bad options.
In both cases you have to think one reason that road wasn't taken is due to the personal risk (pretty large in Sunak's case) that the person in charge would be humiliated by losing after 6 months as PM. While going on for 2 years or so proved the worst of all worlds, as it's not long enough to properly fix anything but long enough for people to remember you're not this new face with new ideas, and blame you for said problems.
Sunak could plausibly have made it a post-covid election and tried to contrast his safe pair of hands approach with Starmer's reckless grandstanding.
Yes that could well have worked. But it would have required Starmer to play ball and do some reckless grandstanding.
Such a short memory, as I know only too well
‘Johnson Variant’, what a prat
What a tw@.
That's your next PM, right there.
For those who think they will get something better than Rishi Sunak. Spoiler alert...
Quite incredible really, that the man who looks certain to be our next PM by virtue of being a sensible person with integrity, was calling for us to remain under restrictions solely so he could point the finger at his rival, who he had desperately named a relatively harmless new strain of Covid after
Why would anyone hang on in this situation, just to climb this leaderboard? Isn’t that the biggest insult, to suggest their motivation here is themself, not party or country? Surely this sort of talk is for fiction books, not reality?
The only thought on Sunak’s mind and the team of highly paid professionals and scientists around him, is to get the best possible election result from this year and situation.They know the only thing that can possibly do this is to win the battle of the campaigns. Picking the most favourable backdrop of news narrative to campaign in front of is not only top most consideration on the list, it is the only consideration on the list, this longest serving lead table 100% does not come into it.
Do you actually believe this? Do lefty PBers really think Sunak and Tories think in this fictitious way? Are you placing bets believing this?
Silly, pointless header.
Thank you for your kind words ;-)
You know you've hit rock bottom when Loon Rabbit criticises you for thinking in a fictitious way.
Indeed, also what was Reagan's response to the Beirut barracks bombing that killed 241 American marines, soldiers, and sailors?
According to Caspar Weinberger, then United States Secretary of Defense, there is no knowledge of who did the bombing.[12] Some analysis highlights the role of Hezbollah and Iran, calling it "an Iranian operation from top to bottom".[13] There is no consensus on whether Hezbollah existed at the time of bombing.[14] The attacks eventually led to the withdrawal of the international peacekeeping force from Lebanon, where they had been stationed following the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) withdrawal in the aftermath of Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon.
Indeed, also what was Reagan's response to the Beirut barracks bombing that killed 241 American marines, soldiers, and sailors?
According to Caspar Weinberger, then United States Secretary of Defense, there is no knowledge of who did the bombing.[12] Some analysis highlights the role of Hezbollah and Iran, calling it "an Iranian operation from top to bottom".[13] There is no consensus on whether Hezbollah existed at the time of bombing.[14] The attacks eventually led to the withdrawal of the international peacekeeping force from Lebanon, where they had been stationed following the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) withdrawal in the aftermath of Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon.
The situation now is entirely different to the Lebanon in the 80s
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
Fujitsu, the Japanese IT giant at the centre of the Post Office Horizon scandal, is planning to introduce artificial intelligence face-scanning systems into Britain’s supermarkets to automatically check shoppers’ ages.
The company has developed technology to be used at supermarket self-service tills that will estimate shoppers’ ages based on facial analysis.
Last week, the Home Office took a step towards allowing AI to check shoppers’ ages, saying it would consult on changes allowing supermarkets to use software that estimates if a buyer is over 18.
Fujitsu’s system has been approved by the UK’s age verification scheme, which said it was 99.9pc accurate at detecting that an 18-year-old shopper was under the age of 25.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Can you think fictitiously? That's a question for philosophers.
The philosopher's first task would be to frame the question clearly so there was no doubt as to what it meant and that it is plain as to what sort of response would constitute an answer.
Fujitsu, the Japanese IT giant at the centre of the Post Office Horizon scandal, is planning to introduce artificial intelligence face-scanning systems into Britain’s supermarkets to automatically check shoppers’ ages.
The company has developed technology to be used at supermarket self-service tills that will estimate shoppers’ ages based on facial analysis.
Last week, the Home Office took a step towards allowing AI to check shoppers’ ages, saying it would consult on changes allowing supermarkets to use software that estimates if a buyer is over 18.
Fujitsu’s system has been approved by the UK’s age verification scheme, which said it was 99.9pc accurate at detecting that an 18-year-old shopper was under the age of 25.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
In all seriousness, I am not sure, in an election year, how Biden can avoid striking Iran directly, now
Otherwise he looks like a kind of mummified Jimmy Carter
They could hit Iranian oil export facilities which would cripple the Iranian economy. But oil (and US voters' gas) prices would spike. And give Putin a boost to his revenues. Not ideal.
Or they could utterly pulverise the Iranians' proxies, the Houthis.
But the Saudis would be happy enough with either outcome.
Must have been painful for the Telegraph to write this.
Labour risks reigniting the debt crisis that brought down Liz Truss if it commits to unsustainable spending after coming to power, a top bond investor has warned.
Pictet, a Swiss bank and asset manager, said that concerns over British stability have not gone away and the markets will be quick to punish financial recklessness.
César Pérez Ruiz, the company’s chief investment officer, also warned Rishi Sunak against unaffordable tax cuts as he battles to remain prime minister in the wake of a polling collapse.
Pictet – which manages almost £600bn of assets – will avoid buying government debt and sterling amid concerns over the general election expected later this year.
Mr Pérez Ruiz said: “If Labour comes in and starts spending money they do not have, the bond vigilantes will be back here again. And so yes, I am con
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Fujitsu, the Japanese IT giant at the centre of the Post Office Horizon scandal, is planning to introduce artificial intelligence face-scanning systems into Britain’s supermarkets to automatically check shoppers’ ages.
The company has developed technology to be used at supermarket self-service tills that will estimate shoppers’ ages based on facial analysis.
Last week, the Home Office took a step towards allowing AI to check shoppers’ ages, saying it would consult on changes allowing supermarkets to use software that estimates if a buyer is over 18.
Fujitsu’s system has been approved by the UK’s age verification scheme, which said it was 99.9pc accurate at detecting that an 18-year-old shopper was under the age of 25.
I'm conflicted over whether she should be suspended. Nonetheless her point was best left unsaid after she remembered the holocaust. Starmer seems to be hamstrung after Corbynista anti-Semitism, and cannot utter a word that sounds like it might be a criticism of Israel.
That said I am very nervous of where Netanyahu is taking this conflict. Yes he had every right to attack Hamas, but even Dave is now hinting Bibi might be overstepping the mark. if we look at Max Hastings's analysis from almost 30 years ago, it would appear Bibi doesn't like Arabs, whether they are Hamas terrorists or not.
Fujitsu, the Japanese IT giant at the centre of the Post Office Horizon scandal, is planning to introduce artificial intelligence face-scanning systems into Britain’s supermarkets to automatically check shoppers’ ages.
The company has developed technology to be used at supermarket self-service tills that will estimate shoppers’ ages based on facial analysis.
Last week, the Home Office took a step towards allowing AI to check shoppers’ ages, saying it would consult on changes allowing supermarkets to use software that estimates if a buyer is over 18.
Fujitsu’s system has been approved by the UK’s age verification scheme, which said it was 99.9pc accurate at detecting that an 18-year-old shopper was under the age of 25.
It's also a type of Machine Learning that has had serious difficulties in the past. Any Machine Learning system is only as good as the data that is fed into it, and we can only hope that the dataset of picture accurately represents Britain's ethnic makeup...
Fujitsu, the Japanese IT giant at the centre of the Post Office Horizon scandal, is planning to introduce artificial intelligence face-scanning systems into Britain’s supermarkets to automatically check shoppers’ ages.
The company has developed technology to be used at supermarket self-service tills that will estimate shoppers’ ages based on facial analysis.
Last week, the Home Office took a step towards allowing AI to check shoppers’ ages, saying it would consult on changes allowing supermarkets to use software that estimates if a buyer is over 18.
Fujitsu’s system has been approved by the UK’s age verification scheme, which said it was 99.9pc accurate at detecting that an 18-year-old shopper was under the age of 25.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, but the Shi'ites are crazy, they perform the tatbir on themselves.
Regarding the thread header, Labour supporter recommends against ditching Sunak before the election in non-shock. They don't want a fresh leader to present a whole new headache for their deeply average (to be kind) leader who has failed to build any trust or favourability with the electorate, and is relying entirely on the shitness of Sunak to give him the keys to Number 10.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, but the Shi'ites are crazy, they perform the tatbir on themselves.
If I was a massive anti Semite loon (I’m not) I’d say this was Bibi’s and Israel’s plan from the start
Seduce Hamas into making an outrageous attack on Israel (by weirdly ignoring all the warnings of attack). Make sure, by your lacklustre response, that the Hamas attack is so vile and “successful” it justifies a massive Israeli retaliation. However, then go so far in the retaliation it arouses the world and drags in the USA, Iran, other actors into a quasi-global crisis, which will, inevitably, lead Iran to hit American forces at some point, quite directly
Endgame: encourage America to wipe out Iran as a threat, for the foreseeable future
Job done. Gaza is leveled; Iran is “pacified”
I repeat, I do not believe this is what is occurring, but knowing the mad anti-Semite mindset, I bet this becomes a popular theory
If I was a massive anti Semite loon (I’m not) I’d say this was Bibi’s and Israel’s plan from the start
Seduce Hamas into making an outrageous attack on Israel (by weirdly ignoring all the warnings of attack). Make sure, by your lacklustre response, that the Hamas attack is so vile and “successful” it justifies a massive Israeli retaliation. However, then go so far in the retaliation it arouses the world and drags in the USA, Iran, other actors into a quasi-global crisis, which will, inevitably, lead Iran to hit American forces at some point, quite directly
Endgame: encourage America to wipe out Iran as a threat, for the foreseeable future
Job done. Gaza is leveled; Iran is “pacified”
I repeat, I do not believe this is what is occurring, but knowing the mad anti-Semite mindset, I bet this becomes a popular theory
Why would one have to be anti-semitical to believe that account? It speaks to the wickedness and deviousness of politicians, not the propensity of a specific race to do anything in particular. By its nature such a scheme could not have included wide consent from Israelis or Jews.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, kinda, but Sunni Islam is far bigger than Shi’ites in numbers.
Talking about “Sunni” Islam in this context is about as useful as talking about “Protestant” Christianity with a spectrum of fire and brimstone Southern Baptists to woolly liberal CoE types.
Admittedly, the Salafi movement of Sunni Islam, specifically that branch started by Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, has been turbocharged by Saudi oil money and can be thought of as a back to basics muscular strand of Sunni Islam, so that’s been in the ascendant for a while. Sufi Islam, far less fashionable now, is more contemplative, mystical and esoteric. Unfortunately, we plonked the Wahhabadists on top of all the oil and gave them Mecca, a bit like giving Rome to Billy Graham.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, kinda, but Sunni Islam is far bigger than Shi’ites in numbers.
Talking about “Sunni” Islam in this context is about as useful as talking about “Protestant” Christianity with a spectrum of fire and brimstone Southern Baptists to woolly liberal CoE types.
Admittedly, the Salafi movement of Sunni Islam, specifically that branch started by Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, has been turbocharged by Saudi oil money and can be thought of as a back to basics muscular strand of Sunni Islam, so that’s been in the ascendant for a while. Sufi Islam, far less fashionable now, is more contemplative, mystical and esoteric. Unfortunately, we plonked the Wahhabadists on top of all the oil and gave them Mecca, a bit like giving Rome to Billy Graham.
Mystical Sufi Islam has always seemed quite appealing to me. And what happened to the lovely wistful hedonistic Islam of the Rubaaiyat of Omar Khayyam with his flasks of wine and lovers in the shade of a tree?
Its like Christianity was entirely taken over by the wee free Presbyterians
I don't own a cafe, but I do own a shop. We are open only half days on Tuesday and Wednesday, and closed completely Monday and Thursday. Why? Because being open Costs Money. Lights. Heating. Staff costs (not that we have any at the moment but cafes will).
When you open a new public-facing business you need to build a presence and attract people in. But you also have to balance costs and cash flow. Our business is lucky in that it doesn't need to pay rent. Or bills. Or wages. Yet. And we're still needing to balance revenue potential vs costs.
My brother once owned a cafe. Costs killed it after the local school banned kids from going out at lunchtime. And in January 2024 so many businesses have had to cope with huge cost inflation which they can't just recover by putting up prices. That is why they aren't open more - they can't afford to be.
Read up on the SME debt crisis...
Good thinking. Locals will know when the shop is open. Visitors won’t be undertaking Passeggiata through New Pitsligo on a Monday evening.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, but the Shi'ites are crazy, they perform the tatbir on themselves.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, kinda, but Sunni Islam is far bigger than Shi’ites in numbers.
Talking about “Sunni” Islam in this context is about as useful as talking about “Protestant” Christianity with a spectrum of fire and brimstone Southern Baptists to woolly liberal CoE types.
Admittedly, the Salafi movement of Sunni Islam, specifically that branch started by Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, has been turbocharged by Saudi oil money and can be thought of as a back to basics muscular strand of Sunni Islam, so that’s been in the ascendant for a while. Sufi Islam, far less fashionable now, is more contemplative, mystical and esoteric. Unfortunately, we plonked the Wahhabadists on top of all the oil and gave them Mecca, a bit like giving Rome to Billy Graham.
All those types of Protestants are quite clearly Protestants though, and share several commonalities, despite different ways of observing their faith.
I have a fair bit of respect for the type of Shi-ite Islam practised in Syria by Assad (and presumably a good many others) which allows him to pray in a Church at Easter, and for Christmas to be widely celebrated. It is a shame that we in the West decided to try to remove that arrangement in favour of an Islamist basket case.
The Oklahoma Republican party passed a "censure" resolution condemning their GOP Sen. James Lankford for the "crime" of ignoring Trump's orders and working with Democrats on a bill that would dramatically increase security at the border:
"Until Senator Lankford ceases from these actions, the Oklahoma Republican Party will cease all support for him,” the resolution states
Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't,
Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.
Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.
Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.
I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.
We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.
Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.
Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
Past performance doesn't predict future performance, as any fule kno!
Polling for Tories (and Reform too if you add them in) is pisspoor below the age of 50 and you are doing less than zero about it.
Indeed, the problem for the Tories isn't that they are doing badly among the Under 50s, it's that they are doing catastrophically badly. Comically badly. They aren't just unpopular, to all intents and purposes, outside a few oddballs, those who expect to remain in the workforce for 20 years or more have stopped voting Tory almost altogether.
Sure, that should improve in opposition as general polling improves and they recalibrate - but to the level of health where previously won? They have been so bad for and elicit such anger among the Under 40s in particular that the shift maybe generational and permanent - a cohort which won't forgive or forget.
Plus, there are little signs the Tory party is capable of coming to terms with this and why they are despised. There's the odd noise from outsiders about housebuilding. Which would be welcome, but one thing among many, and something Labour should find it much easier to outbid them on. Similar for infrastructure.
To take Brexit as an example. It's not going to define how opponents (the vast majority of the young as they were in 2016) vote forever or even now. But it's going to be very difficult to persuade people to give you a chance if they believe your signature achievement, the one the Conservative Party now defines itself by, was a terrible error that created chaos and made them poorer.
"Don't let them back in or they'll ruin Britain like they did last time" is going to be a powerful and persuasive argument to be used against the Tories for a very long time. And one that simple demographics will cement, given those who have been infuriated by and made poorer by the Tories are younger than those they have protected and enriched.
I think there are two different things going on and it is a mistake to conflate them
The cohort that is 40-50 were becoming politically aware during the fag-end of Major’s government /Blair’s prime. That fixed their political views (non-Tory) in the way that the Winter of Discontent did and, possibly Brexit will (too early to say)
Sub-40 I think it’s more about economics - this cohort don’t have an economic stake (housing) and so less to conserve plus social attitudes have evolved fast and the Tories have not (in part) kept up.
But of course it's not just that. Otherwise those who had done well for themselves would still vote Tory. And I can tell you they very much aren't. I have friends who own places in London on v high salaries who are more anti-Tory than I am.
It's a deadly combination of the economics, public services seen as declining, Brexit being seen as a bad move, being reactionary on social issues (people often find 'wokeness' tiresome but asked to choose between that and the likes of Lee Anderson, there's only one winner), and generally being a bit of a joke with the chaos. It's become axiomatic that this has been a terrible government in multiple ways. Some of which the Tories will never have a mea culpa for or a reckoning with as they have become part of Tory dogma and identity.
Obviously there are slight differences as you go through age groups - the very young are more socially conscious but arguably more entrepreneurial (or venal) for instance. But in general the point is simple. It's cohorts that have spent most of their working lives under these last few Tory governments, and view them as having repeatedly made decisions that now regard as harmful to them and terrible for the country - even if they didn't view them as that initially.
That's going to be a very difficult perception to reverse. Especially when you're precluded from making the biggest gestures that would show you're a changed party.
That’s a very good post. Especially the overview of why this government has blown it with so many voters.
Everyone can see that the country is broken; nothing works any more. Which is why the Tories’ talking about future tax cuts or abolishing IHT misses the target entirely. Especially after a decade when they’ve penalised those working, both rich and poor, to support the elderly and economically inactive.
The LibDems’ increasing obsession with what I regard as fringe social issues was a secondary factor behind my deciding no longer to be a member. But Casino’s Meldrew-tribute-act on here made me realise that, if it really has to be a binary choice (the sensible middle way of course being the best course of action), it is better to be on the right side of history rather than join Casino and his mini-me Leon in sticking up for the Neanderthals.
It is becoming hard to see what pitch the Tories can make in GE24 that won’t be met with guffaws of incredulity?
As a potential voter the Govt has blown it with, I also think those are a couple of very interesting posts.
I became somewhat politically and in conscious at an early age - about late-70s early-Thatcher. Partly through going to sleep with the radio playing from the age of about 11 (remember Radio Newsreel?), including World Service and sometimes even the foreign service of Radio Moscow.
One very formative experience for me was difficulty in getting to school because Arthur Scargill sent his mob of perhaps 1000-2000 flying thugs down the motorway to intimidate Nottinghamshire workers at Badminton Colliery. I suggest subsequent events including Scargill's campaign to make the NUM subsidise his lifestyle of the rich, and the looting of NUM Funds by a certain MP justify that evaluation (no names for OGH's sake), confirm that he was always a bad 'un - yet I find a belief in some that that behaviour was somehow OK.
I am always reluctant to vote for a party with TU affiliation, because imo politically-driven TUs in the UK are poisonous - and I can point at plenty of examples even after the TU reforms we have had, starting with McClusky and his cabal. I think I have perhaps only voted for Labour twice since - eg Gloria de Piero in 2015. But then much of the time I have only been offered a clown and a deadbeat as candidates, in Dennis Skinner and Geoff Hoon.
I don't buy the thing about "younger generations being more socially conscious" - I think that is a self-delusion that does not stand the test of history, and varies by area of society; I think it's fair to call society more individualistic now, and I am not sure either about "more environmentally conscious". It was the post-hippy or hippy-turned-practical generation that did the hard yards on much of that, and every UK Govt since 1990 that has been seriously building foundations for a greener future. Until Sunak & the current Tory leadership started burning it all down to save his butt.
Nor do I buy the thing about penalising working people to support pensioners, since pensioners have not had significant support - but perhaps I know more pensioners living on the basic pension than others here.
Current Tories? I am at the point of saying that I will never again vote Conservative, which is what I will tell Lee Anderson or his representative should they knock on my door. Translated into practice that is likely to mean 15-20 years (ie current generation of Tories), which is how long that type of resolution tends to last with me.
My reasons for that stance are their lost moral compass plus inability to govern competently in a post-Brexit environment. I'm still happy to support Brexit, as my main motivation is being outside the horrors of EU politics. I'd support single market without being subsumed by the political structures.
So my vote is available for Labour next time, dependent on getting a sane candidate. None has been appointed for Ashfield yet.
I assume you mean Babbington Colliery not Badminton - Babbington Colliery was just off the M1 on the A610 - It's now Phoenix Park site of the Nottingham Tram. Agree entirely with your voting intentions - Tories have lost my vote cos they are incompetent/stupid whilst Labour have lost it due to Brexit Referendum 2. Lib Dems no chance. I will vote Reform if Nigel takes over otherwise Green or No Vote. I know a lot of former Tory voters like you or me. FWIW I think Lee Anderson will retain his seat.
Yes - Babbington. The dual carriageways were full of flying pickets on that day.
On Lee Anderson, I'd say that Ben Bradley is safer. So if Anderson survives, so will Bradley imo.
I really can't call Ashfield as I can't call the Ashfield Independents. Despite all the slings and arrows, they increased their seats at the last Local Elections. Some of their supporters are extraordinarily loyal.
Two factors are that there has been a lot of housing built in both Ashfield and Mansfield over recent yeas, and both are becoming to some extent commuter towns for Nottingham more than previously (via Robin Hood line light rai partially).
I would not consider Hucknall (southern end of Ashfield Constituency) to be a Nottingham suburb since they are also on the tramway network. Nottingham centric people voting in Ashfield. It is noticeable that house prices there have relatively increased by perhaps 10%+ over a period of years compared to similar housing stick *not* on the tram network.
A third factor is that our District Hospital (Mansfield / Ashfield borders) is now 600 beds and has 3000+ staff, which would probably mainly go against Conservative this time. Many live locally (inexpensive housing), but a small but not tiny number of staff I met whilst in there for 3 weeks last summer commute quite some distance to work there - I met ones coming from both Nottingham and Sheffield.
Hi, Agree entirely with Ben Bradley - he used to be my local County Councillor - why voters are loyal to Ashfield Independents puzzles me as well I honestly thought their period of rule would bring them down. I think Nottingham City Council consider Hucknall to be in their area of influence as to be honest so do I,I live in Hucknall so my MP is Mark Spencer so difficult to call.
Could it be that the assorted representatives of the traditional parties have beeb so poor that none of them are worthy of a vote?
"And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to."
The misogyny on display here is quite something.
Let's ignore for the moment Art. 3 of the ECHR or the Mandela Principles on prisons.
The women prisoners are not even mentioned and the idea that they should have a say or, even, a veto on whether a male offender should be locked up with them simply does not even occur to him. Women prisoners must simply put up with the risk or reality of rape or violence or indecent exposure or voyeurism. Because their rights or views don't matter.
And then @kinabalu has the nerve to say that trans rights are at risk of being rolled back. No they aren't: in this country trans people have exactly the same legal rights as everyone else. There is no political party which has put forward any proposal to remove any of these legal rights. What they do not have and should not have is the right to take away the rights of others - the right of women to single sex spaces, services or associations, for instance. And yet that is the explicit campaigning position of trans activist groups. It is the explicit position of such groups to want the removal of one type of offence of rape - rape by deception. Very progressive, that: wanting to be able to deceive women into sex.
But, hey, who cares about consent!
And what is also very common is those who come out with this totally ignore the court judgments which women have been winning in recent years, funded by endless crowd-funding, to preserve their existing rights. Those judgments are long but are worth reading, especially by those who opine on the law without understanding it, without understanding why ignoring what the law says causes real harm to others and without understanding the reality of what women have endured.
There is something deeply unpleasant about the way in which any woman talking about women's' rights or needs or the reality of what life is like because of their sex is almost always automatically attacked as bigoted or hateful because she does not centre or deem as the only important thing the demands of men.
I expect the usual suspects will do this to me too. But, fuck it, I don't care. Women are not support animals for men. Men's demands are not "rights". Men's feelings are not more important than anyone else's. Women's rights are human rights. Anyone seeking to limit or remove them is not, in any sense, "progressive" or "liberal".
Regarding the thread header, Labour supporter recommends against ditching Sunak before the election in non-shock. They don't want a fresh leader to present a whole new headache for their deeply average (to be kind) leader who has failed to build any trust or favourability with the electorate, and is relying entirely on the shitness of Sunak to give him the keys to Number 10.
I'm not recommending against ditching Sunak, far from it, I would love nothing better than for the Tories to get rid of Sunak right now. Not because any other Tory leader would do any better but because another leadership crisis would sink the Tories further into the realms of electoral oblivion. Hence my "...assuming also that his MPs are not crazy enough to stick the dagger in before the election..."
I can reassure those PBers worried about everything being broken that ASDA isn't.
And has carrots on offer at 39p per kilo.
Now for those bewailing that 'nothing works', or at least that 'nothing works' in the public sector, might I suggest that a misallocation of funds could be playing a part.
This year the government is going to spend about £1.2 trillion quid:
About half of that going on Social Protection and Health and almost all of that going to either the old or the poor.
So those who want to increase spending on the courts or the passport office then make a case for spending a little less on the ever demanding oldies and poories.
The problem being that spending money on the courts or the passport office is less of a vote winner.
Giving out a £2.1 billion dividend as profits plunge 80% to £197.8 million indicates everything is just peachy?
If I was a massive anti Semite loon (I’m not) I’d say this was Bibi’s and Israel’s plan from the start
Seduce Hamas into making an outrageous attack on Israel (by weirdly ignoring all the warnings of attack). Make sure, by your lacklustre response, that the Hamas attack is so vile and “successful” it justifies a massive Israeli retaliation. However, then go so far in the retaliation it arouses the world and drags in the USA, Iran, other actors into a quasi-global crisis, which will, inevitably, lead Iran to hit American forces at some point, quite directly
Endgame: encourage America to wipe out Iran as a threat, for the foreseeable future
Job done. Gaza is leveled; Iran is “pacified”
I repeat, I do not believe this is what is occurring, but knowing the mad anti-Semite mindset, I bet this becomes a popular theory
If I was a massive anti Semite loon (I’m not) I’d say this was Bibi’s and Israel’s plan from the start
Seduce Hamas into making an outrageous attack on Israel (by weirdly ignoring all the warnings of attack). Make sure, by your lacklustre response, that the Hamas attack is so vile and “successful” it justifies a massive Israeli retaliation. However, then go so far in the retaliation it arouses the world and drags in the USA, Iran, other actors into a quasi-global crisis, which will, inevitably, lead Iran to hit American forces at some point, quite directly
Endgame: encourage America to wipe out Iran as a threat, for the foreseeable future
Job done. Gaza is leveled; Iran is “pacified”
I repeat, I do not believe this is what is occurring, but knowing the mad anti-Semite mindset, I bet this becomes a popular theory
I don’t think that’s an unbelievable view. Fairliered. After another excellent Mrs. F meal. With wine. Beer first. Now on the malt whisky. It’s great not having work tomorrow!
Regarding the thread header, Labour supporter recommends against ditching Sunak before the election in non-shock. They don't want a fresh leader to present a whole new headache for their deeply average (to be kind) leader who has failed to build any trust or favourability with the electorate, and is relying entirely on the shitness of Sunak to give him the keys to Number 10.
I'm not recommending against ditching Sunak, far from it, I would love nothing better than for the Tories to get rid of Sunak right now. Not because any other Tory leader would do any better but because another leadership crisis would sink the Tories further into the realms of electoral oblivion. Hence my "...assuming also that his MPs are not crazy enough to stick the dagger in before the election..."
Calling a course of action crazy *is* a recommendation against it in any form of English as we currently understand it.
Fujitsu, the Japanese IT giant at the centre of the Post Office Horizon scandal, is planning to introduce artificial intelligence face-scanning systems into Britain’s supermarkets to automatically check shoppers’ ages.
The company has developed technology to be used at supermarket self-service tills that will estimate shoppers’ ages based on facial analysis.
Last week, the Home Office took a step towards allowing AI to check shoppers’ ages, saying it would consult on changes allowing supermarkets to use software that estimates if a buyer is over 18.
Fujitsu’s system has been approved by the UK’s age verification scheme, which said it was 99.9pc accurate at detecting that an 18-year-old shopper was under the age of 25.
Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't,
Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.
Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.
Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.
I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.
We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.
Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.
Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
Past performance doesn't predict future performance, as any fule kno!
Polling for Tories (and Reform too if you add them in) is pisspoor below the age of 50 and you are doing less than zero about it.
Indeed, the problem for the Tories isn't that they are doing badly among the Under 50s, it's that they are doing catastrophically badly. Comically badly. They aren't just unpopular, to all intents and purposes, outside a few oddballs, those who expect to remain in the workforce for 20 years or more have stopped voting Tory almost altogether.
Sure, that should improve in opposition as general polling improves and they recalibrate - but to the level of health where previously won? They have been so bad for and elicit such anger among the Under 40s in particular that the shift maybe generational and permanent - a cohort which won't forgive or forget.
Plus, there are little signs the Tory party is capable of coming to terms with this and why they are despised. There's the odd noise from outsiders about housebuilding. Which would be welcome, but one thing among many, and something Labour should find it much easier to outbid them on. Similar for infrastructure.
To take Brexit as an example. It's not going to define how opponents (the vast majority of the young as they were in 2016) vote forever or even now. But it's going to be very difficult to persuade people to give you a chance if they believe your signature achievement, the one the Conservative Party now defines itself by, was a terrible error that created chaos and made them poorer.
"Don't let them back in or they'll ruin Britain like they did last time" is going to be a powerful and persuasive argument to be used against the Tories for a very long time. And one that simple demographics will cement, given those who have been infuriated by and made poorer by the Tories are younger than those they have protected and enriched.
I think there are two different things going on and it is a mistake to conflate them
The cohort that is 40-50 were becoming politically aware during the fag-end of Major’s government /Blair’s prime. That fixed their political views (non-Tory) in the way that the Winter of Discontent did and, possibly Brexit will (too early to say)
Sub-40 I think it’s more about economics - this cohort don’t have an economic stake (housing) and so less to conserve plus social attitudes have evolved fast and the Tories have not (in part) kept up.
But of course it's not just that. Otherwise those who had done well for themselves would still vote Tory. And I can tell you they very much aren't. I have friends who own places in London on v high salaries who are more anti-Tory than I am.
It's a deadly combination of the economics, public services seen as declining, Brexit being seen as a bad move, being reactionary on social issues (people often find 'wokeness' tiresome but asked to choose between that and the likes of Lee Anderson, there's only one winner), and generally being a bit of a joke with the chaos. It's become axiomatic that this has been a terrible government in multiple ways. Some of which the Tories will never have a mea culpa for or a reckoning with as they have become part of Tory dogma and identity.
Obviously there are slight differences as you go through age groups - the very young are more socially conscious but arguably more entrepreneurial (or venal) for instance. But in general the point is simple. It's cohorts that have spent most of their working lives under these last few Tory governments, and view them as having repeatedly made decisions that now regard as harmful to them and terrible for the country - even if they didn't view them as that initially.
That's going to be a very difficult perception to reverse. Especially when you're precluded from making the biggest gestures that would show you're a changed party.
That’s a very good post. Especially the overview of why this government has blown it with so many voters.
Everyone can see that the country is broken; nothing works any more. Which is why the Tories’ talking about future tax cuts or abolishing IHT misses the target entirely. Especially after a decade when they’ve penalised those working, both rich and poor, to support the elderly and economically inactive.
The LibDems’ increasing obsession with what I regard as fringe social issues was a secondary factor behind my deciding no longer to be a member. But Casino’s Meldrew-tribute-act on here made me realise that, if it really has to be a binary choice (the sensible middle way of course being the best course of action), it is better to be on the right side of history rather than join Casino and his mini-me Leon in sticking up for the Neanderthals.
It is becoming hard to see what pitch the Tories can make in GE24 that won’t be met with guffaws of incredulity?
As a potential voter the Govt has blown it with, I also think those are a couple of very interesting posts.
I became somewhat politically and in conscious at an early age - about late-70s early-Thatcher. Partly through going to sleep with the radio playing from the age of about 11 (remember Radio Newsreel?), including World Service and sometimes even the foreign service of Radio Moscow.
One very formative experience for me was difficulty in getting to school because Arthur Scargill sent his mob of perhaps 1000-2000 flying thugs down the motorway to intimidate Nottinghamshire workers at Badminton Colliery. I suggest subsequent events including Scargill's campaign to make the NUM subsidise his lifestyle of the rich, and the looting of NUM Funds by a certain MP justify that evaluation (no names for OGH's sake), confirm that he was always a bad 'un - yet I find a belief in some that that behaviour was somehow OK.
I am always reluctant to vote for a party with TU affiliation, because imo politically-driven TUs in the UK are poisonous - and I can point at plenty of examples even after the TU reforms we have had, starting with McClusky and his cabal. I think I have perhaps only voted for Labour twice since - eg Gloria de Piero in 2015. But then much of the time I have only been offered a clown and a deadbeat as candidates, in Dennis Skinner and Geoff Hoon.
I don't buy the thing about "younger generations being more socially conscious" - I think that is a self-delusion that does not stand the test of history, and varies by area of society; I think it's fair to call society more individualistic now, and I am not sure either about "more environmentally conscious". It was the post-hippy or hippy-turned-practical generation that did the hard yards on much of that, and every UK Govt since 1990 that has been seriously building foundations for a greener future. Until Sunak & the current Tory leadership started burning it all down to save his butt.
Nor do I buy the thing about penalising working people to support pensioners, since pensioners have not had significant support - but perhaps I know more pensioners living on the basic pension than others here.
Current Tories? I am at the point of saying that I will never again vote Conservative, which is what I will tell Lee Anderson or his representative should they knock on my door. Translated into practice that is likely to mean 15-20 years (ie current generation of Tories), which is how long that type of resolution tends to last with me.
My reasons for that stance are their lost moral compass plus inability to govern competently in a post-Brexit environment. I'm still happy to support Brexit, as my main motivation is being outside the horrors of EU politics. I'd support single market without being subsumed by the political structures.
So my vote is available for Labour next time, dependent on getting a sane candidate. None has been appointed for Ashfield yet.
I assume you mean Babbington Colliery not Badminton - Babbington Colliery was just off the M1 on the A610 - It's now Phoenix Park site of the Nottingham Tram. Agree entirely with your voting intentions - Tories have lost my vote cos they are incompetent/stupid whilst Labour have lost it due to Brexit Referendum 2. Lib Dems no chance. I will vote Reform if Nigel takes over otherwise Green or No Vote. I know a lot of former Tory voters like you or me. FWIW I think Lee Anderson will retain his seat.
Yes - Babbington. The dual carriageways were full of flying pickets on that day.
On Lee Anderson, I'd say that Ben Bradley is safer. So if Anderson survives, so will Bradley imo.
I really can't call Ashfield as I can't call the Ashfield Independents. Despite all the slings and arrows, they increased their seats at the last Local Elections. Some of their supporters are extraordinarily loyal.
Two factors are that there has been a lot of housing built in both Ashfield and Mansfield over recent yeas, and both are becoming to some extent commuter towns for Nottingham more than previously (via Robin Hood line light rai partially).
I would not consider Hucknall (southern end of Ashfield Constituency) to be a Nottingham suburb since they are also on the tramway network. Nottingham centric people voting in Ashfield. It is noticeable that house prices there have relatively increased by perhaps 10%+ over a period of years compared to similar housing stick *not* on the tram network.
A third factor is that our District Hospital (Mansfield / Ashfield borders) is now 600 beds and has 3000+ staff, which would probably mainly go against Conservative this time. Many live locally (inexpensive housing), but a small but not tiny number of staff I met whilst in there for 3 weeks last summer commute quite some distance to work there - I met ones coming from both Nottingham and Sheffield.
Hi, Agree entirely with Ben Bradley - he used to be my local County Councillor - why voters are loyal to Ashfield Independents puzzles me as well I honestly thought their period of rule would bring them down. I think Nottingham City Council consider Hucknall to be in their area of influence as to be honest so do I,I live in Hucknall so my MP is Mark Spencer so difficult to call.
To me AIs are basically Lib Dems plus Brexit and a couple of other things - they even occupy the old Lib Dem shop unit in the high street. Like LDs they swing their needle in whatever direction will get votes.
The schism was caused iirc by the events around Zadrozny in 2015 which emerged "conveniently" a few weeks before the 2015 Election - warmed over old allegations from 10 years previously. People I know look very suspiciously at the local Labour Party on the basis of cui bono. Police kept him under investigation for 2 years or so, then the case was withdrawn at the door of the court, which was shocking behaviour by the police / CPS. On this point he seems to me to deserve some sympathy, regardless of the other financial stuff before and since.
At one point whilst still a LibDem back in 2007 he achieved a swing of 50%+:
Remember that Simon Hughes told conference in the closing session before Ming’s speech that he was planning to help in a Nottinghamshire County Council by-election on his way home?
Despite the filthy weather that day, Simon’s help clearly paid off. Today was polling day, and an intrepid count-goer has texted the result to Lib Dem Voice’s Night Editor.
Members of the Labour Party should look away now.
UKIP 70 2% Con 222 8% Lab 435 16% Lib Dem 1979 73%
Congrats to all concerned, including newly elected Cllr Jazon Zadrozny. I’m sure someone will be along in the morning who can calculate swing properly, but my calculation from the results last time, where Labour had 45% of the vote and a majority of 981, it’s a swing to the Lib Dems of over 50%.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, kinda, but Sunni Islam is far bigger than Shi’ites in numbers.
Talking about “Sunni” Islam in this context is about as useful as talking about “Protestant” Christianity with a spectrum of fire and brimstone Southern Baptists to woolly liberal CoE types.
Admittedly, the Salafi movement of Sunni Islam, specifically that branch started by Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, has been turbocharged by Saudi oil money and can be thought of as a back to basics muscular strand of Sunni Islam, so that’s been in the ascendant for a while. Sufi Islam, far less fashionable now, is more contemplative, mystical and esoteric. Unfortunately, we plonked the Wahhabadists on top of all the oil and gave them Mecca, a bit like giving Rome to Billy Graham.
Mystical Sufi Islam has always seemed quite appealing to me. And what happened to the lovely wistful hedonistic Islam of the Rubaaiyat of Omar Khayyam with his flasks of wine and lovers in the shade of a tree?
Its like Christianity was entirely taken over by the wee free Presbyterians
Or the DUP.
I don’t often agree with you, @Leon, but I think Iran are a significant danger to world peace and freedom. Whether it’s Russia, Ukraine, Palestine, Yemen or North Korea, Iran seem to have their cancerous tentacles infecting peace. They need to be taught a severe lesson.
Agreed on this. As someone who has never liked the SNP and still doesn't,
Given that it appears to be Groundhog Referendum Day on PB, Remainia is falling well short of where it could be as a country and needs to break free from Leavistan to achieve its long term potential.
Bye bye Barnsley and Bolsover, good luck on your own.
This is clear from some of the not so subtle messaging from Sadiq Khan. Labour's forthcoming victory will further embolden him and others of his persuasion.
Although to win a majority labour needs these areas as much as it needs the big cities.
I'm thinking more of what will happen after, rather than before, the election.
That housebuilding will fall even further behind immigration.
Isn't that the one area where Labour appear to be making a definite commitment?
The Tories made a similar commitment which evaporated after the Chesham and Amersham by election.
Difference is that C+A is a must win seat for the Conservatives, and core Nimby is pretty much core Conservative demographic.
Whereas Labour's core vote is fed up with overpriced flat shares and their winning Amersham is the blob of icing on the icing figurine on the icing on the cake.
And home owners have traditionally been more inclined to vote Tory so Labour have every incentive to talk the talk but not walk the walk.
There is increasing evidence that social values are forestalling the traditional shift to voting Conservative as people near their forties. The traditional economic reasons to vote Tory have disappeared for working age folk, as the Tories only care about featherbedding the retired vote.
I think too that by building around the cities that the Labour vote moving into more marginal suburban and commuter seats could well make the Labour vote more efficient and flip a lot of previously safe Shire seats.
We are dealing with a new political world, and new demographics.
Are we? In 2019 the Conservatives won most voters over 39, in 2005 and 2001 the Tories won only most voters over 55.
Given the Tories back gay marriage and don't want to ban abortion or make changing sex illegal social values are hardly a major issue.
Brexit maybe but then most voters over 47 voted for Brexit, not most voters over 77, so plenty of mileage in that yet for them. Indeed far more voters voted for Brexit than currently back the Tories
Past performance doesn't predict future performance, as any fule kno!
Polling for Tories (and Reform too if you add them in) is pisspoor below the age of 50 and you are doing less than zero about it.
Indeed, the problem for the Tories isn't that they are doing badly among the Under 50s, it's that they are doing catastrophically badly. Comically badly. They aren't just unpopular, to all intents and purposes, outside a few oddballs, those who expect to remain in the workforce for 20 years or more have stopped voting Tory almost altogether.
Sure, that should improve in opposition as general polling improves and they recalibrate - but to the level of health where previously won? They have been so bad for and elicit such anger among the Under 40s in particular that the shift maybe generational and permanent - a cohort which won't forgive or forget.
Plus, there are little signs the Tory party is capable of coming to terms with this and why they are despised. There's the odd noise from outsiders about housebuilding. Which would be welcome, but one thing among many, and something Labour should find it much easier to outbid them on. Similar for infrastructure.
To take Brexit as an example. It's not going to define how opponents (the vast majority of the young as they were in 2016) vote forever or even now. But it's going to be very difficult to persuade people to give you a chance if they believe your signature achievement, the one the Conservative Party now defines itself by, was a terrible error that created chaos and made them poorer.
"Don't let them back in or they'll ruin Britain like they did last time" is going to be a powerful and persuasive argument to be used against the Tories for a very long time. And one that simple demographics will cement, given those who have been infuriated by and made poorer by the Tories are younger than those they have protected and enriched.
I think there are two different things going on and it is a mistake to conflate them
The cohort that is 40-50 were becoming politically aware during the fag-end of Major’s government /Blair’s prime. That fixed their political views (non-Tory) in the way that the Winter of Discontent did and, possibly Brexit will (too early to say)
Sub-40 I think it’s more about economics - this cohort don’t have an economic stake (housing) and so less to conserve plus social attitudes have evolved fast and the Tories have not (in part) kept up.
But of course it's not just that. Otherwise those who had done well for themselves would still vote Tory. And I can tell you they very much aren't. I have friends who own places in London on v high salaries who are more anti-Tory than I am.
It's a deadly combination of the economics, public services seen as declining, Brexit being seen as a bad move, being reactionary on social issues (people often find 'wokeness' tiresome but asked to choose between that and the likes of Lee Anderson, there's only one winner), and generally being a bit of a joke with the chaos. It's become axiomatic that this has been a terrible government in multiple ways. Some of which the Tories will never have a mea culpa for or a reckoning with as they have become part of Tory dogma and identity.
Obviously there are slight differences as you go through age groups - the very young are more socially conscious but arguably more entrepreneurial (or venal) for instance. But in general the point is simple. It's cohorts that have spent most of their working lives under these last few Tory governments, and view them as having repeatedly made decisions that now regard as harmful to them and terrible for the country - even if they didn't view them as that initially.
That's going to be a very difficult perception to reverse. Especially when you're precluded from making the biggest gestures that would show you're a changed party.
That’s a very good post. Especially the overview of why this government has blown it with so many voters.
Everyone can see that the country is broken; nothing works any more. Which is why the Tories’ talking about future tax cuts or abolishing IHT misses the target entirely. Especially after a decade when they’ve penalised those working, both rich and poor, to support the elderly and economically inactive.
The LibDems’ increasing obsession with what I regard as fringe social issues was a secondary factor behind my deciding no longer to be a member. But Casino’s Meldrew-tribute-act on here made me realise that, if it really has to be a binary choice (the sensible middle way of course being the best course of action), it is better to be on the right side of history rather than join Casino and his mini-me Leon in sticking up for the Neanderthals.
It is becoming hard to see what pitch the Tories can make in GE24 that won’t be met with guffaws of incredulity?
As a potential voter the Govt has blown it with, I also think those are a couple of very interesting posts.
I became somewhat politically and in conscious at an early age - about late-70s early-Thatcher. Partly through going to sleep with the radio playing from the age of about 11 (remember Radio Newsreel?), including World Service and sometimes even the foreign service of Radio Moscow.
One very formative experience for me was difficulty in getting to school because Arthur Scargill sent his mob of perhaps 1000-2000 flying thugs down the motorway to intimidate Nottinghamshire workers at Badminton Colliery. I suggest subsequent events including Scargill's campaign to make the NUM subsidise his lifestyle of the rich, and the looting of NUM Funds by a certain MP justify that evaluation (no names for OGH's sake), confirm that he was always a bad 'un - yet I find a belief in some that that behaviour was somehow OK.
I am always reluctant to vote for a party with TU affiliation, because imo politically-driven TUs in the UK are poisonous - and I can point at plenty of examples even after the TU reforms we have had, starting with McClusky and his cabal. I think I have perhaps only voted for Labour twice since - eg Gloria de Piero in 2015. But then much of the time I have only been offered a clown and a deadbeat as candidates, in Dennis Skinner and Geoff Hoon.
I don't buy the thing about "younger generations being more socially conscious" - I think that is a self-delusion that does not stand the test of history, and varies by area of society; I think it's fair to call society more individualistic now, and I am not sure either about "more environmentally conscious". It was the post-hippy or hippy-turned-practical generation that did the hard yards on much of that, and every UK Govt since 1990 that has been seriously building foundations for a greener future. Until Sunak & the current Tory leadership started burning it all down to save his butt.
Nor do I buy the thing about penalising working people to support pensioners, since pensioners have not had significant support - but perhaps I know more pensioners living on the basic pension than others here.
Current Tories? I am at the point of saying that I will never again vote Conservative, which is what I will tell Lee Anderson or his representative should they knock on my door. Translated into practice that is likely to mean 15-20 years (ie current generation of Tories), which is how long that type of resolution tends to last with me.
My reasons for that stance are their lost moral compass plus inability to govern competently in a post-Brexit environment. I'm still happy to support Brexit, as my main motivation is being outside the horrors of EU politics. I'd support single market without being subsumed by the political structures.
So my vote is available for Labour next time, dependent on getting a sane candidate. None has been appointed for Ashfield yet.
I assume you mean Babbington Colliery not Badminton - Babbington Colliery was just off the M1 on the A610 - It's now Phoenix Park site of the Nottingham Tram. Agree entirely with your voting intentions - Tories have lost my vote cos they are incompetent/stupid whilst Labour have lost it due to Brexit Referendum 2. Lib Dems no chance. I will vote Reform if Nigel takes over otherwise Green or No Vote. I know a lot of former Tory voters like you or me. FWIW I think Lee Anderson will retain his seat.
Yes - Babbington. The dual carriageways were full of flying pickets on that day.
On Lee Anderson, I'd say that Ben Bradley is safer. So if Anderson survives, so will Bradley imo.
I really can't call Ashfield as I can't call the Ashfield Independents. Despite all the slings and arrows, they increased their seats at the last Local Elections. Some of their supporters are extraordinarily loyal.
Two factors are that there has been a lot of housing built in both Ashfield and Mansfield over recent yeas, and both are becoming to some extent commuter towns for Nottingham more than previously (via Robin Hood line light rai partially).
I would not consider Hucknall (southern end of Ashfield Constituency) to be a Nottingham suburb since they are also on the tramway network. Nottingham centric people voting in Ashfield. It is noticeable that house prices there have relatively increased by perhaps 10%+ over a period of years compared to similar housing stick *not* on the tram network.
A third factor is that our District Hospital (Mansfield / Ashfield borders) is now 600 beds and has 3000+ staff, which would probably mainly go against Conservative this time. Many live locally (inexpensive housing), but a small but not tiny number of staff I met whilst in there for 3 weeks last summer commute quite some distance to work there - I met ones coming from both Nottingham and Sheffield.
Hi, Agree entirely with Ben Bradley - he used to be my local County Councillor - why voters are loyal to Ashfield Independents puzzles me as well I honestly thought their period of rule would bring them down. I think Nottingham City Council consider Hucknall to be in their area of influence as to be honest so do I,I live in Hucknall so my MP is Mark Spencer so difficult to call.
To me AIs are basically Lib Dems plus Brexit and a couple of other things - they even occupy the old Lib Dem shop unit in the high street. Like LDs they swing their needle in whatever direction will get votes.
The schism was caused iirc by the events around Zadrozny in 2015 which emerged "conveniently" a few weeks before the 2015 Election - warmed over old allegations from 10 years previously. People I know look very suspiciously at the local Labour Party on the basis of cui bono. Police kept him under investigation for 2 years or so, then the case was withdrawn at the door of the court, which was shocking behaviour by the police / CPS. On this point he seems to me to deserve some sympathy, regardless of the other financial stuff before and since.
At one point whilst still a LibDem back in 2007 he achieved a swing of 50%+:
Remember that Simon Hughes told conference in the closing session before Ming’s speech that he was planning to help in a Nottinghamshire County Council by-election on his way home?
Despite the filthy weather that day, Simon’s help clearly paid off. Today was polling day, and an intrepid count-goer has texted the result to Lib Dem Voice’s Night Editor.
Members of the Labour Party should look away now.
UKIP 70 2% Con 222 8% Lab 435 16% Lib Dem 1979 73%
Congrats to all concerned, including newly elected Cllr Jazon Zadrozny. I’m sure someone will be along in the morning who can calculate swing properly, but my calculation from the results last time, where Labour had 45% of the vote and a majority of 981, it’s a swing to the Lib Dems of over 50%.
I'm not slow to criticise anti-semitism, which runs rife amongst the Corbynistas, but I'm struggling to see what's wrong with that post?
The reference to Gaza as genocide, I assume.
Which is debatable. Labour has double standards, for sure, on who it suspends the whip from and who it doesn’t.
If Osamor deserves suspension then surely Tahrir Ali would have merited it too.
He didn't call it a genocide, or equate it with the Holocaust.
He referred to war crimes, which is tenable (although I doubt if he would be so quick to point the finger at Hamas) and made a political point, which made him look rather silly, a la BJO.
Also AFAIK he has an otherwise fairly clean record (some silliness over Russia aside) while Osamor has been in trouble several times, including with the law.
Finally, it seems she sent it to her constituency party, who are all up in arms as a large number of them are Jewish.
I'm conflicted over whether she should be suspended. Nonetheless her point was best left unsaid after she remembered the holocaust. Starmer seems to be hamstrung after Corbynista anti-Semitism, and cannot utter a word that sounds like it might be a criticism of Israel.
That said I am very nervous of where Netanyahu is taking this conflict. Yes he had every right to attack Hamas, but even Dave is now hinting Bibi might be overstepping the mark. if we look at Max Hastings's analysis from almost 30 years ago, it would appear Bibi doesn't like Arabs, whether they are Hamas terrorists or not.
Whether Bibi's current policy is genocide might be questionable, but it certainly smells like ethnic cleansing.
Ethnic cleansing isn't a defined crime under international law, unlike genocide. Whether Israel's actions in Gaza are genocide or alternatively crimes against humanity depends on how much the violence is targeted at eliminating a particular group.
Regarding the thread header, Labour supporter recommends against ditching Sunak before the election in non-shock. They don't want a fresh leader to present a whole new headache for their deeply average (to be kind) leader who has failed to build any trust or favourability with the electorate, and is relying entirely on the shitness of Sunak to give him the keys to Number 10.
I'm not recommending against ditching Sunak, far from it, I would love nothing better than for the Tories to get rid of Sunak right now. Not because any other Tory leader would do any better but because another leadership crisis would sink the Tories further into the realms of electoral oblivion. Hence my "...assuming also that his MPs are not crazy enough to stick the dagger in before the election..."
Calling a course of action crazy *is* a recommendation against it in any form of English as we currently understand it.
The Post Office scandal - on top of many others - has so severely dented my belief in the capacity or willingness of the state or its institutions, including the legal system, to avoid doing harm or put right its mistakes, that I seriously wonder whether there is any point to politics at all.
Why should I trust the state when I see how badly it behaves? Why should I bother doing the right thing when it does not even try to do likewise? When those who behave like scoundrels are rewarded and praised? And the rest of us treated like mugs?
I will not be voting for the Tories. But as of now I am disinclined to vote for anyone at all. They all seem rotten, self-serving and incompetent. They have done a great deal to break the bonds of trust which should exist in a well-ordered society. They are doing very little to earn it, to earn mine anyway. Until they do, I am not at all inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They either don't want my vote or take me for granted. So, frankly, they can fuck right off and come back when they have learnt as a bare minimum how to behave with a modicum of integrity, competence and basic decency.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, kinda, but Sunni Islam is far bigger than Shi’ites in numbers.
Talking about “Sunni” Islam in this context is about as useful as talking about “Protestant” Christianity with a spectrum of fire and brimstone Southern Baptists to woolly liberal CoE types.
Admittedly, the Salafi movement of Sunni Islam, specifically that branch started by Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, has been turbocharged by Saudi oil money and can be thought of as a back to basics muscular strand of Sunni Islam, so that’s been in the ascendant for a while. Sufi Islam, far less fashionable now, is more contemplative, mystical and esoteric. Unfortunately, we plonked the Wahhabadists on top of all the oil and gave them Mecca, a bit like giving Rome to Billy Graham.
Mystical Sufi Islam has always seemed quite appealing to me. And what happened to the lovely wistful hedonistic Islam of the Rubaaiyat of Omar Khayyam with his flasks of wine and lovers in the shade of a tree?
Its like Christianity was entirely taken over by the wee free Presbyterians
Or the DUP.
I don’t often agree with you, @Leon, but I think Iran are a significant danger to world peace and freedom. Whether it’s Russia, Ukraine, Palestine, Yemen or North Korea, Iran seem to have their cancerous tentacles infecting peace. They need to be taught a severe lesson.
My longstanding view since October last year is that this is all semi-planned and coordinated; Russia needs the west to be as busy as possible, with its attention away from Ukraine, and the Red Sea / Israel are ideal ways of doing it. It's probably in Iran's interests as well. Well, not the Iranian people's interests, but the regime's.
I might be wrong and the flare-ups might be much more fluid and organic than that, but I doubt it.
The Oklahoma Republican party passed a "censure" resolution condemning their GOP Sen. James Lankford for the "crime" of ignoring Trump's orders and working with Democrats on a bill that would dramatically increase security at the border:
"Until Senator Lankford ceases from these actions, the Oklahoma Republican Party will cease all support for him,” the resolution states
Certainly is a cult. And unless US indie voters turn out in their droves in swing states in November and stop him, the cult will be running America for a very long time.
There were some really naiive people in 2020 who seemed to have assumed Trump's hold on the party would weaken. On the contrary, it is stronger than ever. The number of voices speaking against him has actually diminished, it's the same ones every time - Cheney, Kinzinger and so on - and the previously normal action of Senators or House Members not jumping to do the bidding of someone who is not even yet the nominee (technically anyway), because america prides itself on independence, is dead outside of maybe a few of the stronger governors (but that doesn't matter as they are loyal enough for the presidential race at least).
I'm not slow to criticise anti-semitism, which runs rife amongst the Corbynistas, but I'm struggling to see what's wrong with that post?
Last three words?
Whether or not you regard Israel's actions in Gaza as a genocide, it's quite inflammatory to bring this in to a post about Holocaust Memorial Day.
Just because the Jews suffered the holocaust doesn’t mean they are incapable of genocide.
I agree. However, it is and was always going to be controversial to mention a 'genocide' currently being perpetrated by the ancestors of many of the victims of the Holocaust, in a post about Holocaust Memorial day.
The Post Office scandal - on top of many others - has so severely dented my belief in the capacity or willingness of the state or its institutions, including the legal system, to avoid doing harm or put right its mistakes, that I seriously wonder whether there is any point to politics at all.
Why should I trust the state when I see how badly it behaves? Why should I bother doing the right thing when it does not even try to do likewise? When those who behave like scoundrels are rewarded and praised? And the rest of us treated like mugs?
I will not be voting for the Tories. But as of now I am disinclined to vote for anyone at all. They all seem rotten, self-serving and incompetent. They have done a great deal to break the bonds of trust which should exist in a well-ordered society. They are doing very little to earn it, to earn mine anyway. Until they do, I am not at all inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They either don't want my vote or take me for granted. So, frankly, they can fuck right off and come back when they have learnt as a bare minimum how to behave with a modicum of integrity, competence and basic decency.
Despair is an understandable reaction, but I would argue parties do not learn lessons from from people refusing to vote. They can get by just fine with apathy and low turnout, so long as the cycle continues to give them a shot at a future election.
I'm not slow to criticise anti-semitism, which runs rife amongst the Corbynistas, but I'm struggling to see what's wrong with that post?
The reference to Gaza as genocide, I assume.
Which is debatable. Labour has double standards, for sure, on who it suspends the whip from and who it doesn’t.
If Osamor deserves suspension then surely Tahrir Ali would have merited it too.
He didn't call it a genocide, or equate it with the Holocaust.
He referred to war crimes, which is tenable (although I doubt if he would be so quick to point the finger at Hamas) and made a political point, which made him look rather silly, a la BJO.
Also AFAIK he has an otherwise fairly clean record (some silliness over Russia aside) while Osamor has been in trouble several times, including with the law.
Finally, it seems she sent it to her constituency party, who are all up in arms as a large number of them are Jewish.
Ali said the PM, personally, has the blood of hundreds of Palestinians on his hands. An absurd statement and accusing the PM of personal culpability which he clearly does not have.
Ali has also fallen foul of the law, during Covid.
I doubt ‘all’ of her CLP are up in arms about it. Some may be. Others will be supportive.
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, kinda, but Sunni Islam is far bigger than Shi’ites in numbers.
Talking about “Sunni” Islam in this context is about as useful as talking about “Protestant” Christianity with a spectrum of fire and brimstone Southern Baptists to woolly liberal CoE types.
Admittedly, the Salafi movement of Sunni Islam, specifically that branch started by Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, has been turbocharged by Saudi oil money and can be thought of as a back to basics muscular strand of Sunni Islam, so that’s been in the ascendant for a while. Sufi Islam, far less fashionable now, is more contemplative, mystical and esoteric. Unfortunately, we plonked the Wahhabadists on top of all the oil and gave them Mecca, a bit like giving Rome to Billy Graham.
All those types of Protestants are quite clearly Protestants though, and share several commonalities, despite different ways of observing their faith.
I have a fair bit of respect for the type of Shi-ite Islam practised in Syria by Assad (and presumably a good many others) which allows him to pray in a Church at Easter, and for Christmas to be widely celebrated. It is a shame that we in the West decided to try to remove that arrangement in favour of an Islamist basket case.
The torturer Assad is an Alawite; they split from the Shia 1000 years ago. Good luck to any outsider who tries to work out what they think and believe; though as with all everywhere most of the ordinary ones will be decent people who don't torture others before having them executed and thrown to the dogs.
The Oklahoma Republican party passed a "censure" resolution condemning their GOP Sen. James Lankford for the "crime" of ignoring Trump's orders and working with Democrats on a bill that would dramatically increase security at the border:
"Until Senator Lankford ceases from these actions, the Oklahoma Republican Party will cease all support for him,” the resolution states
Certainly is a cult. And unless US indie voters turn out in their droves in swing states in November and stop him, the cult will be running America for a very long time.
There were some really naiive people in 2020 who seemed to have assumed Trump's hold on the party would weaken. On the contrary, it is stronger than ever. The number of voices speaking against him has actually diminished, it's the same ones every time - Cheney, Kinzinger and so on - and the previously normal action of Senators or House Members not jumping to do the bidding of someone who is not even yet the nominee (technically anyway), because america prides itself on independence, is dead outside of maybe a few of the stronger governors (but that doesn't matter as they are loyal enough for the presidential race at least).
I dont think it was particularly naive to assume that in 2020/21, it was a plausible path, possibly even a likely one. There were some possible off ramps in 2021 especially, and even 2022. However maintaining that position by 2023 was either very naive or optimistic or probably both. It may still yet happen before the Presidential election but it is a slim chance now.
The Oklahoma Republican party passed a "censure" resolution condemning their GOP Sen. James Lankford for the "crime" of ignoring Trump's orders and working with Democrats on a bill that would dramatically increase security at the border:
"Until Senator Lankford ceases from these actions, the Oklahoma Republican Party will cease all support for him,” the resolution states
Certainly is a cult. And unless US indie voters turn out in their droves in swing states in November and stop him, the cult will be running America for a very long time.
There were some really naiive people in 2020 who seemed to have assumed Trump's hold on the party would weaken. On the contrary, it is stronger than ever. The number of voices speaking against him has actually diminished, it's the same ones every time - Cheney, Kinzinger and so on - and the previously normal action of Senators or House Members not jumping to do the bidding of someone who is not even yet the nominee (technically anyway), because america prides itself on independence, is dead outside of maybe a few of the stronger governors (but that doesn't matter as they are loyal enough for the presidential race at least).
I dont think it was particularly naive to assume that in 2020/21, it was a plausible path, possibly even a likely one. There were some possible off ramps in 2021 especially, and even 2022. However maintaining that position by 2023 was either very naive or optimistic or probably both. It may still yet happen before the Presidential election but it is a slim chance now.
It was naiive in that they felt they did not have to do anything to sever his hold on the party, and in fact stood in the way of attempts to do that, assuming it would take care of itself.
The Post Office scandal - on top of many others - has so severely dented my belief in the capacity or willingness of the state or its institutions, including the legal system, to avoid doing harm or put right its mistakes, that I seriously wonder whether there is any point to politics at all.
Why should I trust the state when I see how badly it behaves? Why should I bother doing the right thing when it does not even try to do likewise? When those who behave like scoundrels are rewarded and praised? And the rest of us treated like mugs?
I will not be voting for the Tories. But as of now I am disinclined to vote for anyone at all. They all seem rotten, self-serving and incompetent. They have done a great deal to break the bonds of trust which should exist in a well-ordered society. They are doing very little to earn it, to earn mine anyway. Until they do, I am not at all inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They either don't want my vote or take me for granted. So, frankly, they can fuck right off and come back when they have learnt as a bare minimum how to behave with a modicum of integrity, competence and basic decency.
I can understand why you say that, and feel that way myself at times, but I'll also counter it. The 'state' generally does reasonably well. Things certainly are not as good as they can be thanks to the current government, but we're nowhere near (say) South Africa's levels of chaos. Not that we should be aiming for comparisons that low, but there is a comparison to be made.
Employment is high. The economy is, if not good, not terrible. The bins get collected. Most of us can see a doctor in a reasonable timeframe - for free. Things generally work, albeit somewhat chaotically. The 'state' makes mistakes - but it always has. And there are an awful lot of good workers within, and without, the state; people who work hard and diligently for both themselves and others. Yet we hear about the scoundrels.
Also, I'd say most politicians are good people, albeit flawed, as are we all. Some are sometimes put into positions they do not have the capability to do well, but there are few I would count as truly venal. And some who are absolute stars (IMO George Howarth being one such). But we rarely get to hear about them, as they just get on with their jobs.
I'd also add that I think there are very few states that are doing really well at the moment, particularly of the large economies, and not a single country has zero problems or issues. Neither is it realistic to expect that.
There's no other country I'd prefer to live in, if I was rich, or if I was poor.
The Post Office scandal - on top of many others - has so severely dented my belief in the capacity or willingness of the state or its institutions, including the legal system, to avoid doing harm or put right its mistakes, that I seriously wonder whether there is any point to politics at all.
Why should I trust the state when I see how badly it behaves? Why should I bother doing the right thing when it does not even try to do likewise? When those who behave like scoundrels are rewarded and praised? And the rest of us treated like mugs?
I will not be voting for the Tories. But as of now I am disinclined to vote for anyone at all. They all seem rotten, self-serving and incompetent. They have done a great deal to break the bonds of trust which should exist in a well-ordered society. They are doing very little to earn it, to earn mine anyway. Until they do, I am not at all inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They either don't want my vote or take me for granted. So, frankly, they can fuck right off and come back when they have learnt as a bare minimum how to behave with a modicum of integrity, competence and basic decency.
Maybe it’s time for violent revolution. Pity we’re too old! 😀
Regarding the thread header, Labour supporter recommends against ditching Sunak before the election in non-shock. They don't want a fresh leader to present a whole new headache for their deeply average (to be kind) leader who has failed to build any trust or favourability with the electorate, and is relying entirely on the shitness of Sunak to give him the keys to Number 10.
Sunak as opposed to your favoured candidate (the S and M lady) seems inch perfect by comparison.
The Post Office scandal - on top of many others - has so severely dented my belief in the capacity or willingness of the state or its institutions, including the legal system, to avoid doing harm or put right its mistakes, that I seriously wonder whether there is any point to politics at all.
Why should I trust the state when I see how badly it behaves? Why should I bother doing the right thing when it does not even try to do likewise? When those who behave like scoundrels are rewarded and praised? And the rest of us treated like mugs?
I will not be voting for the Tories. But as of now I am disinclined to vote for anyone at all. They all seem rotten, self-serving and incompetent. They have done a great deal to break the bonds of trust which should exist in a well-ordered society. They are doing very little to earn it, to earn mine anyway. Until they do, I am not at all inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They either don't want my vote or take me for granted. So, frankly, they can fuck right off and come back when they have learnt as a bare minimum how to behave with a modicum of integrity, competence and basic decency.
I can understand why you say that, and feel that way myself at times, but I'll also counter it. The 'state' generally does reasonably well. Things certainly are not as good as they can be thanks to the current government, but we're nowhere near (say) South Africa's levels of chaos. Not that we should be aiming for comparisons that low, but there is a comparison to be made.
Employment is high. The economy is, if not good, not terrible. The bins get collected. Most of us can see a doctor in a reasonable timeframe - for free. Things generally work, albeit somewhat chaotically. The 'state' makes mistakes - but it always has. And there are an awful lot of good workers within, and without, the state; people who work hard and diligently for both themselves and others. Yet we hear about the scoundrels.
Also, I'd say most politicians are good people, albeit flawed, as are we all. Some are sometimes put into positions they do not have the capability to do well, but there are few I would count as truly venal. And some who are absolute stars (IMO George Howarth being one such). But we rarely get to hear about them, as they just get on with their jobs.
I'd also add that I think there are very few states that are doing really well at the moment, particularly of the large economies, and not a single country has zero problems or issues. Neither is it realistic to expect that.
There's no other country I'd prefer to live in, if I was rich, or if I was poor.
So we are still able to do things we did 70 years ago, and are grateful for it. Not much sign of progress, is it? Thank goodness our ancestors voted for Attlee in 1945. God knows the state the vast majority of us would be in if we had had a succession of Tory governments since 1945.
The Post Office scandal - on top of many others - has so severely dented my belief in the capacity or willingness of the state or its institutions, including the legal system, to avoid doing harm or put right its mistakes, that I seriously wonder whether there is any point to politics at all.
Why should I trust the state when I see how badly it behaves? Why should I bother doing the right thing when it does not even try to do likewise? When those who behave like scoundrels are rewarded and praised? And the rest of us treated like mugs?
I will not be voting for the Tories. But as of now I am disinclined to vote for anyone at all. They all seem rotten, self-serving and incompetent. They have done a great deal to break the bonds of trust which should exist in a well-ordered society. They are doing very little to earn it, to earn mine anyway. Until they do, I am not at all inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They either don't want my vote or take me for granted. So, frankly, they can fuck right off and come back when they have learnt as a bare minimum how to behave with a modicum of integrity, competence and basic decency.
All politics is relative. The relevant comparison with the UK state and UK politics is not Utopia, the heavenly Jerusalem or the Kingdom of God but others states like Syria, Myanmar, China, Sudan and Russia.
My vote for a party which can govern better than Assad and can lose an election without inciting insurrection is a tiny, very tiny, protest against the worst of regimes and exercises a freedom others don't have to keep the state within some civilized boundaries.
Of the options IMHO currently Labour seems the better at the next election. Better than what? The current lot; and the mob that rule in about 150 other countries.
As to the rest of your thoughts about the negligent wickedness of the powerful, Cyclefree, you are of course 100% correct.
Fujitsu, the Japanese IT giant at the centre of the Post Office Horizon scandal, is planning to introduce artificial intelligence face-scanning systems into Britain’s supermarkets to automatically check shoppers’ ages.
The company has developed technology to be used at supermarket self-service tills that will estimate shoppers’ ages based on facial analysis.
Last week, the Home Office took a step towards allowing AI to check shoppers’ ages, saying it would consult on changes allowing supermarkets to use software that estimates if a buyer is over 18.
Fujitsu’s system has been approved by the UK’s age verification scheme, which said it was 99.9pc accurate at detecting that an 18-year-old shopper was under the age of 25.
It's also a type of Machine Learning that has had serious difficulties in the past. Any Machine Learning system is only as good as the data that is fed into it, and we can only hope that the dataset of picture accurately represents Britain's ethnic makeup...
"And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to."
The misogyny on display here is quite something.
Let's ignore for the moment Art. 3 of the ECHR or the Mandela Principles on prisons.
The women prisoners are not even mentioned and the idea that they should have a say or, even, a veto on whether a male offender should be locked up with them simply does not even occur to him. Women prisoners must simply put up with the risk or reality of rape or violence or indecent exposure or voyeurism. Because their rights or views don't matter.
And then @kinabalu has the nerve to say that trans rights are at risk of being rolled back. No they aren't: in this country trans people have exactly the same legal rights as everyone else. There is no political party which has put forward any proposal to remove any of these legal rights. What they do not have and should not have is the right to take away the rights of others - the right of women to single sex spaces, services or associations, for instance. And yet that is the explicit campaigning position of trans activist groups. It is the explicit position of such groups to want the removal of one type of offence of rape - rape by deception. Very progressive, that: wanting to be able to deceive women into sex.
But, hey, who cares about consent!
And what is also very common is those who come out with this totally ignore the court judgments which women have been winning in recent years, funded by endless crowd-funding, to preserve their existing rights. Those judgments are long but are worth reading, especially by those who opine on the law without understanding it, without understanding why ignoring what the law says causes real harm to others and without understanding the reality of what women have endured.
There is something deeply unpleasant about the way in which any woman talking about women's' rights or needs or the reality of what life is like because of their sex is almost always automatically attacked as bigoted or hateful because she does not centre or deem as the only important thing the demands of men.
I expect the usual suspects will do this to me too. But, fuck it, I don't care. Women are not support animals for men. Men's demands are not "rights". Men's feelings are not more important than anyone else's. Women's rights are human rights. Anyone seeking to limit or remove them is not, in any sense, "progressive" or "liberal".
Surely the problem with this rant is it begs the question of whether trans women are women or men. And even if we grant that post-op trans women are women, what about the first day a man dons a frock: when does the transition occur.
And as a practical matter in the context of prison, criminals as a class are not known for their veracity, and there is an incentive for cis men to pretend to be trans women in order to gain access to women's spaces or at least to get a cushier life (whether life in a women's prison is actually better than life in a men's prison is open to doubt but that's another matter).
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
I think if they got the bomb Iran might actually be crazy enough to use it.
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
Yeah, the Shi'ites are fucking crazy.
Most of the issues in the ME seem to come from Sunni groups don't they though? Saudi-backed Salafism. Shi-ites can also be very extreme, but seem to be so in their own states and against their own regional enemies.
Yes, kinda, but Sunni Islam is far bigger than Shi’ites in numbers.
Talking about “Sunni” Islam in this context is about as useful as talking about “Protestant” Christianity with a spectrum of fire and brimstone Southern Baptists to woolly liberal CoE types.
Admittedly, the Salafi movement of Sunni Islam, specifically that branch started by Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, has been turbocharged by Saudi oil money and can be thought of as a back to basics muscular strand of Sunni Islam, so that’s been in the ascendant for a while. Sufi Islam, far less fashionable now, is more contemplative, mystical and esoteric. Unfortunately, we plonked the Wahhabadists on top of all the oil and gave them Mecca, a bit like giving Rome to Billy Graham.
Mystical Sufi Islam has always seemed quite appealing to me. And what happened to the lovely wistful hedonistic Islam of the Rubaaiyat of Omar Khayyam with his flasks of wine and lovers in the shade of a tree?
Its like Christianity was entirely taken over by the wee free Presbyterians
Or the DUP.
I don’t often agree with you, @Leon, but I think Iran are a significant danger to world peace and freedom. Whether it’s Russia, Ukraine, Palestine, Yemen or North Korea, Iran seem to have their cancerous tentacles infecting peace. They need to be taught a severe lesson.
The DUP are really quite moderate in their… DUPness. Compared to religious variants that demand the extermination of Everyone Who Does It Wrong.
The Post Office scandal - on top of many others - has so severely dented my belief in the capacity or willingness of the state or its institutions, including the legal system, to avoid doing harm or put right its mistakes, that I seriously wonder whether there is any point to politics at all.
Why should I trust the state when I see how badly it behaves? Why should I bother doing the right thing when it does not even try to do likewise? When those who behave like scoundrels are rewarded and praised? And the rest of us treated like mugs?
I will not be voting for the Tories. But as of now I am disinclined to vote for anyone at all. They all seem rotten, self-serving and incompetent. They have done a great deal to break the bonds of trust which should exist in a well-ordered society. They are doing very little to earn it, to earn mine anyway. Until they do, I am not at all inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They either don't want my vote or take me for granted. So, frankly, they can fuck right off and come back when they have learnt as a bare minimum how to behave with a modicum of integrity, competence and basic decency.
Comments
Can America/Israel tolerate a world where Iran has nukes with missiles able to destroy Tel Aviv? And, eventually, NYC? Perhaps they can, perhaps they have no choice
But this potential war would be a way of setting back Iran a decade, and hoping that America’s technological lead in AI means Iran can never be a serious threat again (for the foreseeable)
The failure of such an administration is a nailed on certainty, after which we get Kemi if we're lucky, Suella if we ain't.
The Oklahoma Republican party passed a "censure" resolution condemning their GOP Sen. James Lankford for the "crime" of ignoring Trump's orders and working with Democrats on a bill that would dramatically increase security at the border:
"Until Senator Lankford ceases from these actions, the Oklahoma Republican Party will cease all support for him,” the resolution states
It's a cult.
https://twitter.com/RpsAgainstTrump/status/1751643312652534064
This is all poisoned by the US electoral cycle, and seeing which narrative prevails
I reckon Biden will have to hit Iran directly, somehow
https://x.com/theinsiderpaper/status/1751665640375767421?s=61&t=GGp3Vs1t1kTWDiyA-odnZg
Agree entirely with Ben Bradley - he used to be my local County Councillor - why voters are loyal to Ashfield Independents puzzles me as well I honestly thought their period of rule would bring them down.
I think Nottingham City Council consider Hucknall to be in their area of influence as to be honest so do I,I live in Hucknall so my MP is Mark Spencer so difficult to call.
https://twitter.com/planet4589/status/1751657904992649251
First successful flight of the Simorgh Rocket. But they haven't had a fast launch attempt cadence...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simorgh_(rocket)
The reason is simply that after Corbyn the Labour party has pulled itself together, or at least papered over the cracks, whilst the Conservative Party is still riven by factionalism, and any leader has to choose his team like a medieval king, more by reference to their power bases than their ability.
https://twitter.com/johnestevens/status/1751672931103408461
https://vf.politicalbetting.com/discussion/comment/4221575#Comment_4221575
(Mind you, in that comment I was musing about an American attack on Iran to befuddle one of its proxies - in that case, Russia.)
As I recall, the results were not altogether to his advantage.
I don’t think it will be enough, given the problems we face. I suspect he will be a grave disappointment as PM, albeit not as bad as, say, Truss. More like TMay
I'm confused.
THe requirement to be a Republican lawmaker is you must have a lower IQ than Donald Trump, a 77 year old weirdo showing multiple signs of dementia.
FWIW - I agree with this piece.
It’s like comparing the Crimean War with WW1
That's a question for philosophers.
“World War 3 fears as expert warns Iran has uranium to make 12 nuclear bombs in 5 months mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/w…
https://x.com/dailymirror/status/1751659888537727230?s=61&t=GGp3Vs1t1kTWDiyA-odnZg
This was BEFORE the drone strike
Without over-reacting (not my style) it becomes quite difficult to see how we AVOID a major war in the Middle East. Too many powers have an overwhelming interest in not seeing a nuclear armed Iran, and meanwhile Iran has gained the avowed backing of Russia and the tacit approval of China
The stage, as they say, is set
The company has developed technology to be used at supermarket self-service tills that will estimate shoppers’ ages based on facial analysis.
Last week, the Home Office took a step towards allowing AI to check shoppers’ ages, saying it would consult on changes allowing supermarkets to use software that estimates if a buyer is over 18.
Fujitsu’s system has been approved by the UK’s age verification scheme, which said it was 99.9pc accurate at detecting that an 18-year-old shopper was under the age of 25.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/28/fujitsu-post-office-scandal-sell-supermarket-facescanners/
Destruction of Israel is part of their constitution. And they'd probably welcome being martyred in response, so a massive second strike threat wouldn't necessarily deter them.
I'm going with: they let 7 year olds buy whisky.
Or they could utterly pulverise the Iranians' proxies, the Houthis.
But the Saudis would be happy enough with either outcome.
Labour risks reigniting the debt crisis that brought down Liz Truss if it commits to unsustainable spending after coming to power, a top bond investor has warned.
Pictet, a Swiss bank and asset manager, said that concerns over British stability have not gone away and the markets will be quick to punish financial recklessness.
César Pérez Ruiz, the company’s chief investment officer, also warned Rishi Sunak against unaffordable tax cuts as he battles to remain prime minister in the wake of a polling collapse.
Pictet – which manages almost £600bn of assets – will avoid buying government debt and sterling amid concerns over the general election expected later this year.
Mr Pérez Ruiz said: “If Labour comes in and starts spending money they do not have, the bond vigilantes will be back here again. And so yes, I am con
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/01/28/labour-spending-spree-risks-liz-truss-debt-crisis/
That said I am very nervous of where Netanyahu is taking this conflict. Yes he had every right to attack Hamas, but even Dave is now hinting Bibi might be overstepping the mark. if we look at Max Hastings's analysis from almost 30 years ago, it would appear Bibi doesn't like Arabs, whether they are Hamas terrorists or not.
https://twitter.com/DalrympleWill/status/1721163356051288412?lang=en
Whether Bibi's current policy is genocide might be questionable, but it certainly smells like ethnic cleansing.
It is, yet again, Machine Learning.
It's also a type of Machine Learning that has had serious difficulties in the past. Any Machine Learning system is only as good as the data that is fed into it, and we can only hope that the dataset of picture accurately represents Britain's ethnic makeup...
e.g.: https://www.wired.com/story/wrongful-arrests-ai-derailed-3-mens-lives/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatbir
Seduce Hamas into making an outrageous attack on Israel (by weirdly ignoring all the warnings of attack). Make sure, by your lacklustre response, that the Hamas attack is so vile and “successful” it justifies a massive Israeli retaliation. However, then go so far in the retaliation it arouses the world and drags in the USA, Iran, other actors into a quasi-global crisis, which will, inevitably, lead Iran to hit American forces at some point, quite directly
Endgame: encourage America to wipe out Iran as a threat, for the foreseeable future
Job done. Gaza is leveled; Iran is “pacified”
I repeat, I do not believe this is what is occurring, but knowing the mad anti-Semite mindset, I bet this becomes a popular theory
https://x.com/oald24/status/1751664678424498645?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Qasem_Soleimani
Talking about “Sunni” Islam in this context is about as useful as talking about “Protestant” Christianity with a spectrum of fire and brimstone Southern Baptists to woolly liberal CoE types.
Admittedly, the Salafi movement of Sunni Islam, specifically that branch started by Ibn 'Abd al-Wahhab, has been turbocharged by
Saudi oil money and can be thought of as a back to basics muscular strand of Sunni Islam, so that’s been in the ascendant for a while. Sufi Islam, far less fashionable now, is more contemplative, mystical and esoteric. Unfortunately, we plonked the Wahhabadists on top of all the oil and gave them Mecca, a bit like giving Rome to Billy Graham.
Its like Christianity was entirely taken over by the wee free Presbyterians
I have a fair bit of respect for the type of Shi-ite Islam practised in Syria by Assad (and presumably a good many others) which allows him to pray in a Church at Easter, and for Christmas to be widely celebrated. It is a shame that we in the West decided to try to remove that arrangement in favour of an Islamist basket case.
https://x.com/vespa2222/status/1751679282517246073?s=61&t=s0ae0IFncdLS1Dc7J0P_TQ
"And, probably my most controversial opinion- I cannot see the problem in Trans being able to have some say on which gendered prison they go to. Again, subject to the prison authorities and a medical opinion. I've been in a lot of prisons over the years with work, including women's prisons where the person would be much safer in a gender prison they felt more aligned to."
The misogyny on display here is quite something.
Let's ignore for the moment Art. 3 of the ECHR or the Mandela Principles on prisons.
The women prisoners are not even mentioned and the idea that they should have a say or, even, a veto on whether a male offender should be locked up with them simply does not even occur to him. Women prisoners must simply put up with the risk or reality of rape or violence or indecent exposure or voyeurism. Because their rights or views don't matter.
And then @kinabalu has the nerve to say that trans rights are at risk of being rolled back. No they aren't: in this country trans people have exactly the same legal rights as everyone else. There is no political party which has put forward any proposal to remove any of these legal rights. What they do not have and should not have is the right to take away the rights of others - the right of women to single sex spaces, services or associations, for instance. And yet that is the explicit campaigning position of trans activist groups. It is the explicit position of such groups to want the removal of one type of offence of rape - rape by deception. Very progressive, that: wanting to be able to deceive women into sex.
But, hey, who cares about consent!
And what is also very common is those who come out with this totally ignore the court judgments which women have been winning in recent years, funded by endless crowd-funding, to preserve their existing rights. Those judgments are long but are worth reading, especially by those who opine on the law without understanding it, without understanding why ignoring what the law says causes real harm to others and without understanding the reality of what women have endured.
There is something deeply unpleasant about the way in which any woman talking about women's' rights or needs or the reality of what life is like because of their sex is almost always automatically attacked as bigoted or hateful because she does not centre or deem as the only important thing the demands of men.
I expect the usual suspects will do this to me too. But, fuck it, I don't care. Women are not support animals for men. Men's demands are not "rights". Men's feelings are not more important than anyone else's. Women's rights are human rights. Anyone seeking to limit or remove them is not, in any sense, "progressive" or "liberal".
Did Kemi say anything worthwhile about the Post Office?
Whether or not you regard Israel's actions in Gaza as a genocide, it's quite inflammatory to bring this in to a post about Holocaust Memorial Day.
https://www.postofficescandal.uk/post/whats-really-going-on-with-the-subpostmaster-compensation-schemes/
The schism was caused iirc by the events around Zadrozny in 2015 which emerged "conveniently" a few weeks before the 2015 Election - warmed over old allegations from 10 years previously. People I know look very suspiciously at the local Labour Party on the basis of cui bono. Police kept him under investigation for 2 years or so, then the case was withdrawn at the door of the court, which was shocking behaviour by the police / CPS. On this point he seems to me to deserve some sympathy, regardless of the other financial stuff before and since.
At one point whilst still a LibDem back in 2007 he achieved a swing of 50%+:
Remember that Simon Hughes told conference in the closing session before Ming’s speech that he was planning to help in a Nottinghamshire County Council by-election on his way home?
Despite the filthy weather that day, Simon’s help clearly paid off. Today was polling day, and an intrepid count-goer has texted the result to Lib Dem Voice’s Night Editor.
Members of the Labour Party should look away now.
UKIP 70 2%
Con 222 8%
Lab 435 16%
Lib Dem 1979 73%
Congrats to all concerned, including newly elected Cllr Jazon Zadrozny. I’m sure someone will be along in the morning who can calculate swing properly, but my calculation from the results last time, where Labour had 45% of the vote and a majority of 981, it’s a swing to the Lib Dems of over 50%.
https://www.libdemvoice.org/sutton-notts-by-election-613.html
If Osamor deserves suspension then surely Tahrir Ali would have merited it too.
I don’t often agree with you, @Leon, but I think Iran are a significant danger to world peace and freedom. Whether it’s Russia, Ukraine, Palestine, Yemen or North Korea, Iran seem to have their cancerous tentacles infecting peace. They need to be taught a severe lesson.
He referred to war crimes, which is tenable (although I doubt if he would be so quick to point the finger at Hamas) and made a political point, which made him look rather silly, a la BJO.
Also AFAIK he has an otherwise fairly clean record (some silliness over Russia aside) while Osamor has been in trouble several times, including with the law.
Finally, it seems she sent it to her constituency party, who are all up in arms as a large number of them are Jewish.
Why should I trust the state when I see how badly it behaves? Why should I bother doing the right thing when it does not even try to do likewise? When those who behave like scoundrels are rewarded and praised? And the rest of us treated like mugs?
I will not be voting for the Tories. But as of now I am disinclined to vote for anyone at all. They all seem rotten, self-serving and incompetent. They have done a great deal to break the bonds of trust which should exist in a well-ordered society. They are doing very little to earn it, to earn mine anyway. Until they do, I am not at all inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt. They either don't want my vote or take me for granted. So, frankly, they can fuck right off and come back when they have learnt as a bare minimum how to behave with a modicum of integrity, competence and basic decency.
I might be wrong and the flare-ups might be much more fluid and organic than that, but I doubt it.
Ali has also fallen foul of the law, during Covid.
I doubt ‘all’ of her CLP are up in arms about it. Some may be. Others will be supportive.
Employment is high. The economy is, if not good, not terrible. The bins get collected. Most of us can see a doctor in a reasonable timeframe - for free. Things generally work, albeit somewhat chaotically. The 'state' makes mistakes - but it always has. And there are an awful lot of good workers within, and without, the state; people who work hard and diligently for both themselves and others. Yet we hear about the scoundrels.
Also, I'd say most politicians are good people, albeit flawed, as are we all. Some are sometimes put into positions they do not have the capability to do well, but there are few I would count as truly venal. And some who are absolute stars (IMO George Howarth being one such). But we rarely get to hear about them, as they just get on with their jobs.
I'd also add that I think there are very few states that are doing really well at the moment, particularly of the large economies, and not a single country has zero problems or issues. Neither is it realistic to expect that.
There's no other country I'd prefer to live in, if I was rich, or if I was poor.
Thank goodness our ancestors voted for Attlee in 1945. God knows the state the vast majority of us would be in if we had had a succession of Tory governments since 1945.
My vote for a party which can govern better than Assad and can lose an election without inciting insurrection is a tiny, very tiny, protest against the worst of regimes and exercises a freedom others don't have to keep the state within some civilized boundaries.
Of the options IMHO currently Labour seems the better at the next election. Better than what? The current lot; and the mob that rule in about 150 other countries.
As to the rest of your thoughts about the negligent wickedness of the powerful, Cyclefree, you are of course 100% correct.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-719/298854/20240126115645084_23-719 Anderson Respondents Merits Brief.pdf
Are you some kind of Trump Loving Neon Fascist Racist Imperialist implying that The Law* could be wrong?
*Motorcycle with improbably wide tires not included. Helmet not included. Voice activated hand gun not included.
And as a practical matter in the context of prison, criminals as a class are not known for their veracity, and there is an incentive for cis men to pretend to be trans women in order to gain access to women's spaces or at least to get a cushier life (whether life in a women's prison is actually better than life in a men's prison is open to doubt but that's another matter).
In the mean time, here is the Mail's list of women killed by men in 2023
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12799089/Heartbreaking-rollcall-women-girls-killed-men-2023-retired-teacher-83-Beatrice-Corry-murdered-son-Emma-Pattison-daughter-Lettie-Elianne-Andam-Grace-OMalley-Kumar-died-hands-males.html
They speak exactly to this.