The only hope the Tories have is that the public recoil in horror when they see how wooden and insincere Sir Keir is during the campaign. This clip from yesterday gives me some encouragement it could happen.
Have you ever met anyone in real life who is this unnatural? Reminds me of Theresa May at her most awkward
And the Union Jack in the corner of the room. We are Unionists to the core but, weirdly, none of our rooms are decorated with a Union Jack.
People in this country, correctly, lament the choice in the US being between Biden and Trump but we are really not much better.
Everything about him is so obviously scripted & phoney. He is being PR’d to within an inch of his life, but doesn’t have the warmth or charm to pull it off. I realise I am very biased here, as have a real dislike of him, but trying to be objective, surely the public will wince along with me when he’s all over our screens with that Partridge rictus grin come Election time?
I know someone who has met him on a few occasions and had to drive him around - he's apparently really nice. I wanted him to be an absolute twat. I still think he's absolutely not what the UK needs.
"It is time to abolish the two-child benefit cap There is an urgent need to reform a welfare system that does not incentivise work and punishes the poor Suella Braverman"
Labour majority is nailed on but the size of that majority is very much up for grabs and could well affect the election after the next one.
Id agree there. 50 seat majority and imo theyll get mauled in 2029, 150 seat majority and its a 10 year reich minimum Edit - my own projected range at the moment is 50 to 150 weighted slightly to the lower figure
I'm pretty sure the Labour majority, if there is one, will be below 100.
The size of the majority, though, has no bearing on the length of the reich IMHO.
Agreed, though what replaces it if Starmer disappoints?
All the signs point towards a Tory party that will be unelectable in 5 years.
IMO we will be facing a particular risk of a Trump-like non-politician populist in 5 years time.
Yeah, but all the signs don't point that way, do they?
That's projection based on past experience and wishful thinking.
The wishful thinking being “Major didn’t win because we weren’t conservative enough” or “Miliband didn’t win because we weren’t socialist enough” or ditto for Callaghan. So all these wishful thinkers have to be proved wrong, in real time, before normal service can resume. It might be past experience but it is also a recurring pattern.
Yes, that's my point: it's projection based on past experience. In one case, an example from over 25 years ago and another from almost 45 years ago when politics was totally different.
It holds no certainties about what may happen in the future and is just one of many scenarios which, in any case, will be heavily contingent on all sorts of unrelated events entirely beyond the peccadillos of ordinary party members and MPs.
Israeli tanks have entered the Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza city in the north of Gaza.
The Israeli military have also entered the Arroub refugee camp near Al-Khalil ("Hebron") on the West Bank.
Meanwhile 300000 Palestinians have been terrorised out of Rafah in the south of Gaza in the last week - many of whom had been displaced from elsewhere since October. They can't go south to Sinai in Egypt because the Israeli military have closed both gates in the perimeter fence. The only direction they can flee in is northwards.
Meanwhile it seems the USA has already built a pier in the central Netzarim corridor. That's a strip running east-west across Gaza and it's occupied by the Israeli military. The pier is NOT being used to bring in aid. Nor has any aid been brought in through any of the land routes (north or south) since Tuesday.
UNRWA are screaming "There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go". (That is a direct quote.) You can't get much fucking clearer than that.
UNRWA is the UN agency that supplies aid to Palestinian refugees when it's allowed to. Its HQ in occupied Jerusalem was burnt down by armed fascist thugs last week. Since October, the Israelis have killed more than 100 of its staff in Gaza. This is an international humanitarian organisation.
It seems crystal clear that the Israeli plan is to murder a large percentage of the population in Gaza (it has already killed or wounded around 5% since October) and then let the US and its British helpers emergency-deport the survivors to Cyprus - which will probably take a few weeks, and during those weeks you can expect the holding areas to be under constant bombing and shelling.
Fuck whataboutery. This is by far the biggest ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in the world, a crime against humanity (not only in the obvious sense, but in the legal sense too) committed against a people whom the US and Britain don't even recognise as a people sufficiently to allow them to join the United Nations. (The other three veto powers do, as do the majority of countries in the world.)
And?
Something must be done.
I suppose we could ensure that Jewish people are marked out from the rest of the population everywhere so people know who to target. Then I guess we can put them all in once place, you know to keep them safe from those who are targeting them. Though you know, that's really expensive so if a few million of them die in these "camps" then it will make things a lot easier for the rest.
Israel must rid Gaza of Hamas. If the people of Gaza don't hand them over and continue to protect them then this is the result. Instead of blaming Israel how about making the people of Gaza get rid of Hamas. Oh right, they support Hamas and want Israel destroyed and Jews eradicated, maybe in those camps.
I don't think you can get rid of Hamas (although you could try). But there is alternative thinking described in the following thread, which explains a possible alternative or perhaps realistic strategy.
Permananent occupation of a resentful population where 98% oppose your presence doesn't sound like a recipie for long term success either. There are endless new recruits being shaped every day there with nothing else to live for but hatred of the occupation.
There are two ways out of such irregular warfare. Either compromise as we did in Northern Ireland or extermination as per a lot of colonial warfare.
They ought to put up big walls , chuck out all the palestinians and leave them to sort out their own shit.
Lab now having to use up value bandwidth defending their new MP for Dover.
What an utterly stupid decision that was to accept her last week.
Rawnsley in Observer agrees.
Due diligence failure. Might delay or cancel any other 'pipeline' defections (if they actually exist) However for it to turn into a catastrophe it would require a defection/resignation out of Labour or a shadow front bench resignation over it.
One wonders how much better their due diligence is for the incoming crop of candidates/MPs. How many more Jared O'Mara's are lurking on their lists...
Especially with the chance of paper candidates doing a Twigg, we may find out! (Not to besmirch the Twiglet who was solid)
It seems an effort is being made to persuade Andy Street to stand in Solihull where he comes from and some in the party see him as an influential conservative even leader
I do not bet but it would be interesting to see his odds of becoming leader
He'd have a better chance if there were to be a coronation, but the next leadership election is going to be (bitterly) contested.
What chance would a new MP who hasn't had time to build up a base in the parliamentary party have of getting through to the final two?
I could just about see how it might plausibly happen, but he'd depend on the right-wingers being more interested in taking each other out than in arguing against the moderate.
I'd like a Street-ite Conservative Party. But it ain't going to have Andy as its leader.
He's currently 60, ever so slightly younger than Starmer. So at the election after next, he'd be 65. That's just not credible for someone to start being PM.
(Similarly, I can't see SKS doing more than 5 years or so. Win in May 2028, hand over to a successor in autumn 2029, retiring to mild gratitude from the nation.)
That Street is probably the best available candidate for centrist Conservatives just shows how grim the situation is.
I suspect you are right. However, this fixation we seem to have that anyone over 60 is over the hill really has given a series of rubbish PMs who are still wet behind the ears.
Israeli tanks have entered the Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza city in the north of Gaza.
The Israeli military have also entered the Arroub refugee camp near Al-Khalil ("Hebron") on the West Bank.
Meanwhile 300000 Palestinians have been terrorised out of Rafah in the south of Gaza in the last week - many of whom had been displaced from elsewhere since October. They can't go south to Sinai in Egypt because the Israeli military have closed both gates in the perimeter fence. The only direction they can flee in is northwards.
Meanwhile it seems the USA has already built a pier in the central Netzarim corridor. That's a strip running east-west across Gaza and it's occupied by the Israeli military. The pier is NOT being used to bring in aid. Nor has any aid been brought in through any of the land routes (north or south) since Tuesday.
UNRWA are screaming "There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go". (That is a direct quote.) You can't get much fucking clearer than that.
UNRWA is the UN agency that supplies aid to Palestinian refugees when it's allowed to. Its HQ in occupied Jerusalem was burnt down by armed fascist thugs last week. Since October, the Israelis have killed more than 100 of its staff in Gaza. This is an international humanitarian organisation.
It seems crystal clear that the Israeli plan is to murder a large percentage of the population in Gaza (it has already killed or wounded around 5% since October) and then let the US and its British helpers emergency-deport the survivors to Cyprus - which will probably take a few weeks, and during those weeks you can expect the holding areas to be under constant bombing and shelling.
Fuck whataboutery. This is by far the biggest ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in the world, a crime against humanity (not only in the obvious sense, but in the legal sense too) committed against a people whom the US and Britain don't even recognise as a people sufficiently to allow them to join the United Nations. (The other three veto powers do, as do the majority of countries in the world.)
And?
Something must be done.
I suppose we could ensure that Jewish people are marked out from the rest of the population everywhere so people know who to target. Then I guess we can put them all in once place, you know to keep them safe from those who are targeting them. Though you know, that's really expensive so if a few million of them die in these "camps" then it will make things a lot easier for the rest.
Israel must rid Gaza of Hamas. If the people of Gaza don't hand them over and continue to protect them then this is the result. Instead of blaming Israel how about making the people of Gaza get rid of Hamas. Oh right, they support Hamas and want Israel destroyed and Jews eradicated, maybe in those camps.
I don't think you can get rid of Hamas (although you could try). But there is alternative thinking described in the following thread, which explains a possible alternative or perhaps realistic strategy.
Permananent occupation of a resentful population where 98% oppose your presence doesn't sound like a recipie for long term success either. There are endless new recruits being shaped every day there with nothing else to live for but hatred of the occupation.
There are two ways out of such irregular warfare. Either compromise as we did in Northern Ireland or extermination as per a lot of colonial warfare.
The strategy looks like containment. Build buffer zones, destroy Hamas infrastructure, and be able to control strategic sites.
Israel tried the handing it back route.
What was that definition of insanity again.
Treating a people as subhuman and expecting them not to hate you.
I watched a documentary on BBC iPlayer last night called the Gatekeepers. It was interviews of the last 6 heads of Shin Bet, people who very rarely speak publicly.
The common thread was that none of them could see any military or intelligence solution to the problems with the Palestinians. They all recognised that the things they did to protect Israel were not only damaging the Palestinians but the Israeli democracy itself. They saw at least as many risks to that from the Israeli right, particularly the religious right, as Hamas.
As one of them put it, they are in a position to win every battle but still lose the war. What was particularly telling was these men were not wishy washy liberal types, not at all. One admitted instructing the execution of 2 captured Palestinians who had attacked a bus. Another lamented a chance to take out all of Hamas' then leadership when there was a compromise on the size of a bomb in a built up area containing women and children. But they were all in despair.
It was obvious this had been made before October 6th but I was surprised to learn afterwards that it was made in October 2014. Another bloody, futile, hopeless decade with a result that is further from a solution than it was then. It is brilliant background and, on thread, very much a lesson from history, but not exactly cheery.
The other path is the route that the administration and allies and partners and a lot of countries in the Gulf are pushing, and a lot of Israelis want, which is: a hostage deal leads to a long-term cease-fire, leads to a better future for Palestinians both in the West Bank and in Gaza, leads to Saudi-Israel normalization and a path to two states, and a region where the ideology and the violence that Hamas is offering is beaten by more opening, more opportunity, more peace, more stability.
Are you saying that because you believe it or because it’s the Biden administration’s position?
I’m saying it because, anything other than that, this is going to happen again and again and again...
You cannot think seriously about peace in the region without considering the role of Iran, how it has built up a ring of fire around Israel to put it under existential threat. It amazes me how again and again everyone is satisfied to simply talk about stopping/not helping Hamas. How can you expect anyone to sympathise with Israel if their enemy is seen as a bunch of bandits of no real significance?
Why oh why oh why is there a repeated failure to talk about the role of Tehran being the instigator in all of this and much else in the region?
The only hope the Tories have is that the public recoil in horror when they see how wooden and insincere Sir Keir is during the campaign. This clip from yesterday gives me some encouragement it could happen.
Have you ever met anyone in real life who is this unnatural? Reminds me of Theresa May at her most awkward
And the Union Jack in the corner of the room. We are Unionists to the core but, weirdly, none of our rooms are decorated with a Union Jack.
People in this country, correctly, lament the choice in the US being between Biden and Trump but we are really not much better.
Everything about him is so obviously scripted & phoney. He is being PR’d to within an inch of his life, but doesn’t have the warmth or charm to pull it off. I realise I am very biased here, as have a real dislike of him, but trying to be objective, surely the public will wince along with me when he’s all over our screens with that Partridge rictus grin come Election time?
He hasn't screwed your pension or your mortgage, though.
And as for scripting and grinning, have a look at the current incumbent. Filling ordinary cars at ordinary garages?
He has not had chance yet but soon will , hopefully less dangerous than the Great Clunking Fist was.
The only hope the Tories have is that the public recoil in horror when they see how wooden and insincere Sir Keir is during the campaign. This clip from yesterday gives me some encouragement it could happen.
Have you ever met anyone in real life who is this unnatural? Reminds me of Theresa May at her most awkward
And the Union Jack in the corner of the room. We are Unionists to the core but, weirdly, none of our rooms are decorated with a Union Jack.
People in this country, correctly, lament the choice in the US being between Biden and Trump but we are really not much better.
Everything about him is so obviously scripted & phoney. He is being PR’d to within an inch of his life, but doesn’t have the warmth or charm to pull it off. I realise I am very biased here, as have a real dislike of him, but trying to be objective, surely the public will wince along with me when he’s all over our screens with that Partridge rictus grin come Election time?
I know someone who has met him on a few occasions and had to drive him around - he's apparently really nice. I wanted him to be an absolute twat. I still think he's absolutely not what the UK needs.
I suppose every time I see him he is putting on a performance as this whiter than white, pious anti Boris, and he’s just not a very good actor, so he looks stilted and insincere.
Perfectly possible that he’s nice company when he’s chatting about the weather or what he’s having for dinner.
He is apparently a genuine football fan, and I’ve no reason to disbelieve it, yet when asked who should play up front for England in the World Cup he sounded like someone who was reading post it notes from SPADs
Israeli tanks have entered the Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza city in the north of Gaza.
The Israeli military have also entered the Arroub refugee camp near Al-Khalil ("Hebron") on the West Bank.
Meanwhile 300000 Palestinians have been terrorised out of Rafah in the south of Gaza in the last week - many of whom had been displaced from elsewhere since October. They can't go south to Sinai in Egypt because the Israeli military have closed both gates in the perimeter fence. The only direction they can flee in is northwards.
Meanwhile it seems the USA has already built a pier in the central Netzarim corridor. That's a strip running east-west across Gaza and it's occupied by the Israeli military. The pier is NOT being used to bring in aid. Nor has any aid been brought in through any of the land routes (north or south) since Tuesday.
UNRWA are screaming "There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go". (That is a direct quote.) You can't get much fucking clearer than that.
UNRWA is the UN agency that supplies aid to Palestinian refugees when it's allowed to. Its HQ in occupied Jerusalem was burnt down by armed fascist thugs last week. Since October, the Israelis have killed more than 100 of its staff in Gaza. This is an international humanitarian organisation.
It seems crystal clear that the Israeli plan is to murder a large percentage of the population in Gaza (it has already killed or wounded around 5% since October) and then let the US and its British helpers emergency-deport the survivors to Cyprus - which will probably take a few weeks, and during those weeks you can expect the holding areas to be under constant bombing and shelling.
Fuck whataboutery. This is by far the biggest ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in the world, a crime against humanity (not only in the obvious sense, but in the legal sense too) committed against a people whom the US and Britain don't even recognise as a people sufficiently to allow them to join the United Nations. (The other three veto powers do, as do the majority of countries in the world.)
And?
Something must be done.
I suppose we could ensure that Jewish people are marked out from the rest of the population everywhere so people know who to target. Then I guess we can put them all in once place, you know to keep them safe from those who are targeting them. Though you know, that's really expensive so if a few million of them die in these "camps" then it will make things a lot easier for the rest.
Israel must rid Gaza of Hamas. If the people of Gaza don't hand them over and continue to protect them then this is the result. Instead of blaming Israel how about making the people of Gaza get rid of Hamas. Oh right, they support Hamas and want Israel destroyed and Jews eradicated, maybe in those camps.
I don't think you can get rid of Hamas (although you could try). But there is alternative thinking described in the following thread, which explains a possible alternative or perhaps realistic strategy.
Permananent occupation of a resentful population where 98% oppose your presence doesn't sound like a recipie for long term success either. There are endless new recruits being shaped every day there with nothing else to live for but hatred of the occupation.
There are two ways out of such irregular warfare. Either compromise as we did in Northern Ireland or extermination as per a lot of colonial warfare.
They ought to put up big walls , chuck out all the palestinians and leave them to sort out their own shit.
Walls around what? Israel/Palestine is not lacking in walls. Nor is it lacking in examples of chucking out Palestinians. The strategy doesn't seem to have worked.
Israeli tanks have entered the Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza city in the north of Gaza.
The Israeli military have also entered the Arroub refugee camp near Al-Khalil ("Hebron") on the West Bank.
Meanwhile 300000 Palestinians have been terrorised out of Rafah in the south of Gaza in the last week - many of whom had been displaced from elsewhere since October. They can't go south to Sinai in Egypt because the Israeli military have closed both gates in the perimeter fence. The only direction they can flee in is northwards.
Meanwhile it seems the USA has already built a pier in the central Netzarim corridor. That's a strip running east-west across Gaza and it's occupied by the Israeli military. The pier is NOT being used to bring in aid. Nor has any aid been brought in through any of the land routes (north or south) since Tuesday.
UNRWA are screaming "There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go". (That is a direct quote.) You can't get much fucking clearer than that.
UNRWA is the UN agency that supplies aid to Palestinian refugees when it's allowed to. Its HQ in occupied Jerusalem was burnt down by armed fascist thugs last week. Since October, the Israelis have killed more than 100 of its staff in Gaza. This is an international humanitarian organisation.
It seems crystal clear that the Israeli plan is to murder a large percentage of the population in Gaza (it has already killed or wounded around 5% since October) and then let the US and its British helpers emergency-deport the survivors to Cyprus - which will probably take a few weeks, and during those weeks you can expect the holding areas to be under constant bombing and shelling.
Fuck whataboutery. This is by far the biggest ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in the world, a crime against humanity (not only in the obvious sense, but in the legal sense too) committed against a people whom the US and Britain don't even recognise as a people sufficiently to allow them to join the United Nations. (The other three veto powers do, as do the majority of countries in the world.)
And?
Something must be done.
I suppose we could ensure that Jewish people are marked out from the rest of the population everywhere so people know who to target. Then I guess we can put them all in once place, you know to keep them safe from those who are targeting them. Though you know, that's really expensive so if a few million of them die in these "camps" then it will make things a lot easier for the rest.
Israel must rid Gaza of Hamas. If the people of Gaza don't hand them over and continue to protect them then this is the result. Instead of blaming Israel how about making the people of Gaza get rid of Hamas. Oh right, they support Hamas and want Israel destroyed and Jews eradicated, maybe in those camps.
I don't think you can get rid of Hamas (although you could try). But there is alternative thinking described in the following thread, which explains a possible alternative or perhaps realistic strategy.
Permananent occupation of a resentful population where 98% oppose your presence doesn't sound like a recipie for long term success either. There are endless new recruits being shaped every day there with nothing else to live for but hatred of the occupation.
There are two ways out of such irregular warfare. Either compromise as we did in Northern Ireland or extermination as per a lot of colonial warfare.
They ought to put up big walls , chuck out all the palestinians and leave them to sort out their own shit.
Instead they gave jobs to Gazans in Israel. That turned out to be a fucking huge mistake
Israeli tanks have entered the Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza city in the north of Gaza.
The Israeli military have also entered the Arroub refugee camp near Al-Khalil ("Hebron") on the West Bank.
Meanwhile 300000 Palestinians have been terrorised out of Rafah in the south of Gaza in the last week - many of whom had been displaced from elsewhere since October. They can't go south to Sinai in Egypt because the Israeli military have closed both gates in the perimeter fence. The only direction they can flee in is northwards.
Meanwhile it seems the USA has already built a pier in the central Netzarim corridor. That's a strip running east-west across Gaza and it's occupied by the Israeli military. The pier is NOT being used to bring in aid. Nor has any aid been brought in through any of the land routes (north or south) since Tuesday.
UNRWA are screaming "There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go. There is nowhere safe to go". (That is a direct quote.) You can't get much fucking clearer than that.
UNRWA is the UN agency that supplies aid to Palestinian refugees when it's allowed to. Its HQ in occupied Jerusalem was burnt down by armed fascist thugs last week. Since October, the Israelis have killed more than 100 of its staff in Gaza. This is an international humanitarian organisation.
It seems crystal clear that the Israeli plan is to murder a large percentage of the population in Gaza (it has already killed or wounded around 5% since October) and then let the US and its British helpers emergency-deport the survivors to Cyprus - which will probably take a few weeks, and during those weeks you can expect the holding areas to be under constant bombing and shelling.
Fuck whataboutery. This is by far the biggest ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in the world, a crime against humanity (not only in the obvious sense, but in the legal sense too) committed against a people whom the US and Britain don't even recognise as a people sufficiently to allow them to join the United Nations. (The other three veto powers do, as do the majority of countries in the world.)
And?
Something must be done.
I suppose we could ensure that Jewish people are marked out from the rest of the population everywhere so people know who to target. Then I guess we can put them all in once place, you know to keep them safe from those who are targeting them. Though you know, that's really expensive so if a few million of them die in these "camps" then it will make things a lot easier for the rest.
Israel must rid Gaza of Hamas. If the people of Gaza don't hand them over and continue to protect them then this is the result. Instead of blaming Israel how about making the people of Gaza get rid of Hamas. Oh right, they support Hamas and want Israel destroyed and Jews eradicated, maybe in those camps.
I don't think you can get rid of Hamas (although you could try). But there is alternative thinking described in the following thread, which explains a possible alternative or perhaps realistic strategy.
Permananent occupation of a resentful population where 98% oppose your presence doesn't sound like a recipie for long term success either. There are endless new recruits being shaped every day there with nothing else to live for but hatred of the occupation.
There are two ways out of such irregular warfare. Either compromise as we did in Northern Ireland or extermination as per a lot of colonial warfare.
They ought to put up big walls , chuck out all the palestinians and leave them to sort out their own shit.
Walls around what? Israel/Palestine is not lacking in walls. Nor is it lacking in examples of chucking out Palestinians. The strategy doesn't seem to have worked.
There were supposedly shedloads of them working in Israel every day and from what we read they get all their water and electricity from Israel.
The only hope the Tories have is that the public recoil in horror when they see how wooden and insincere Sir Keir is during the campaign. This clip from yesterday gives me some encouragement it could happen.
Have you ever met anyone in real life who is this unnatural? Reminds me of Theresa May at her most awkward
And the Union Jack in the corner of the room. We are Unionists to the core but, weirdly, none of our rooms are decorated with a Union Jack.
People in this country, correctly, lament the choice in the US being between Biden and Trump but we are really not much better.
Everything about him is so obviously scripted & phoney. He is being PR’d to within an inch of his life, but doesn’t have the warmth or charm to pull it off. I realise I am very biased here, as have a real dislike of him, but trying to be objective, surely the public will wince along with me when he’s all over our screens with that Partridge rictus grin come Election time?
I know someone who has met him on a few occasions and had to drive him around - he's apparently really nice. I wanted him to be an absolute twat. I still think he's absolutely not what the UK needs.
I suppose every time I see him he is putting on a performance as this whiter than white, pious anti Boris, and he’s just not a very good actor, so he looks stilted and insincere.
Perfectly possible that he’s nice company when he’s chatting about the weather or what he’s having for dinner.
He is apparently a genuine football fan, and I’ve no reason to disbelieve it, yet when asked who should play up front for England in the World Cup he sounded like someone who was reading post it notes from SPADs
He played 5 a side very regularly; apparently the only time he ever got annoyed was when people on the team were late. I just think he has a pathological fear of offending the electorate and not getting in.
What is the biggest social problem we face. Is it criminals? Is it illegal immigrants? Is it Tory party donors? I'm starting to believe though that the largest social problem we face could be elite, highly desirable men who refuse to commit to long term monogamous relationships and prefer more casual ones.
These are men who are most likely earning a high salary, are good looking and probably come from an above average social background and are now a real social menace. One of the things that puzzles me about modern dating is how people now talk about being 'exclusive', in other words that point in a relationship when you are no longer dating anyone else. Am I really so priggish to think this a little odd. Since so many young men complain that they can't get a date, the obvious conclusion is that we have a few elite men dragging multiple women along simultaneously. Or if not multiple women, at least one who they have no intention of committing to. In the incel language these men are known as 'chads' and I suspect there will be a few pbers who'll get very defensive on this. Perhaps thinking back to their own youth and how they enjoyed duplicitously playing the field. Having now adopted progressive values I doubt they enjoy being seen as the cause of a major social problem. Not that you can really blame the women for this. As one researcher put it recently, you can hardly blame them for choosing a Ferrari over a Ford Fiesta. Dating apps have made all this a heck of a lot worse
You see these women get dragged along by elite men, in some cases for years, only to be dumped and then replaced by a younger women when the time is right. Many of those older women will themselves end up as involuntarily childless. The social consequences of this can be seen in terms of decreasing rates of marriage, births and increasing singledom? Should a society be worried about a rise in the number of single young men?
You now have feminists like Louise Perry proposing truly draconian solutions such as no sex before marriage or at the very least before a man has shown some serious signs of commitment. It does seem remarkable that people are thinking along these terms but it does seem that sexual liberation hasn't worked as well for women as was hoped and a rethink is required. Amidst the depressing statistics it does afford us the opportunity to blame society's failings on well off promiscuous men. And who doesn't enjoy that.
There’s definitely a dating problem coming down the line. Having a large number of single and disaffected young men, is a dangerous prospect for any government, and there’s no suggestion that this particular problem is going to get better any time soon.
What is the biggest social problem we face. Is it criminals? Is it illegal immigrants? Is it Tory party donors? I'm starting to believe though that the largest social problem we face could be elite, highly desirable men who refuse to commit to long term monogamous relationships and prefer more casual ones.
These are men who are most likely earning a high salary, are good looking and probably come from an above average social background and are now a real social menace. One of the things that puzzles me about modern dating is how people now talk about being 'exclusive', in other words that point in a relationship when you are no longer dating anyone else. Am I really so priggish to think this a little odd. Since so many young men complain that they can't get a date, the obvious conclusion is that we have a few elite men dragging multiple women along simultaneously. Or if not multiple women, at least one who they have no intention of committing to. In the incel language these men are known as 'chads' and I suspect there will be a few pbers who'll get very defensive on this. Perhaps thinking back to their own youth and how they enjoyed duplicitously playing the field. Having now adopted progressive values I doubt they enjoy being seen as the cause of a major social problem. Not that you can really blame the women for this. As one researcher put it recently, you can hardly blame them for choosing a Ferrari over a Ford Fiesta. Dating apps have made all this a heck of a lot worse
You see these women get dragged along by elite men, in some cases for years, only to be dumped and then replaced by a younger women when the time is right. Many of those older women will themselves end up as involuntarily childless. The social consequences of this can be seen in terms of decreasing rates of marriage, births and increasing singledom? Should a society be worried about a rise in the number of single young men?
You now have feminists like Louise Perry proposing truly draconian solutions such as no sex before marriage or at the very least before a man has shown some serious signs of commitment. It does seem remarkable that people are thinking along these terms but it does seem that sexual liberation hasn't worked as well for women as was hoped and a rethink is required. Amidst the depressing statistics it does afford us the opportunity to blame society's failings on well off promiscuous men. And who doesn't enjoy that.
If this is true, it's only going to affect a tiny percentage of the population. So I don't think it's that important.
The only hope the Tories have is that the public recoil in horror when they see how wooden and insincere Sir Keir is during the campaign. This clip from yesterday gives me some encouragement it could happen.
Have you ever met anyone in real life who is this unnatural? Reminds me of Theresa May at her most awkward
And the Union Jack in the corner of the room. We are Unionists to the core but, weirdly, none of our rooms are decorated with a Union Jack.
People in this country, correctly, lament the choice in the US being between Biden and Trump but we are really not much better.
Everything about him is so obviously scripted & phoney. He is being PR’d to within an inch of his life, but doesn’t have the warmth or charm to pull it off. I realise I am very biased here, as have a real dislike of him, but trying to be objective, surely the public will wince along with me when he’s all over our screens with that Partridge rictus grin come Election time?
I know someone who has met him on a few occasions and had to drive him around - he's apparently really nice. I wanted him to be an absolute twat. I still think he's absolutely not what the UK needs.
I suppose every time I see him he is putting on a performance as this whiter than white, pious anti Boris, and he’s just not a very good actor, so he looks stilted and insincere.
Perfectly possible that he’s nice company when he’s chatting about the weather or what he’s having for dinner.
He is apparently a genuine football fan, and I’ve no reason to disbelieve it, yet when asked who should play up front for England in the World Cup he sounded like someone who was reading post it notes from SPADs
He played 5 a side very regularly; apparently the only time he ever got annoyed was when people on the team were late. I just think he has a pathological fear of offending the electorate and not getting in.
Yes, I don’t fear him being PM at all out of worry he’s going to do this, that or the other to the country, he seems like a sensible, steady Eddie.
He seems frozen by fear in interviews and I think this will damage him in the campaign, but he probably has a big enough lead in the polls to ride that out anyway.
The only hope the Tories have is that the public recoil in horror when they see how wooden and insincere Sir Keir is during the campaign. This clip from yesterday gives me some encouragement it could happen.
Have you ever met anyone in real life who is this unnatural? Reminds me of Theresa May at her most awkward
And the Union Jack in the corner of the room. We are Unionists to the core but, weirdly, none of our rooms are decorated with a Union Jack.
People in this country, correctly, lament the choice in the US being between Biden and Trump but we are really not much better.
Everything about him is so obviously scripted & phoney. He is being PR’d to within an inch of his life, but doesn’t have the warmth or charm to pull it off. I realise I am very biased here, as have a real dislike of him, but trying to be objective, surely the public will wince along with me when he’s all over our screens with that Partridge rictus grin come Election time?
I know someone who has met him on a few occasions and had to drive him around - he's apparently really nice. I wanted him to be an absolute twat. I still think he's absolutely not what the UK needs.
I suppose every time I see him he is putting on a performance as this whiter than white, pious anti Boris, and he’s just not a very good actor, so he looks stilted and insincere.
Perfectly possible that he’s nice company when he’s chatting about the weather or what he’s having for dinner.
He is apparently a genuine football fan, and I’ve no reason to disbelieve it, yet when asked who should play up front for England in the World Cup he sounded like someone who was reading post it notes from SPADs
He played 5 a side very regularly; apparently the only time he ever got annoyed was when people on the team were late. I just think he has a pathological fear of offending the electorate and not getting in.
Yes, I don’t fear him being PM at all out of worry he’s going to do this, that or the other to the country, he seems like a sensible, steady Eddie.
He seems frozen by fear in interviews and I think this will damage him in the campaign, but he probably has a big enough lead in the polls to ride that out anyway.
A steady Eddy isn't what we need though. We have one at the moment. There are serious issues that need sorting and he's worse than Sunk on every single one.
I thought we'd agreed to not discuss the trans issue anymore.
It's just got up to 25 here in SW London. Next week looks cooler with rain, typical.
No, that was trains.
Now, all please rise for a viewing of the Holy Trinity
What the actual fuck
A deltic engine, as used in the highly unsuccessful, but much-loved, Deltic locomotives that broke down regularly on the ECML for twenty years. A case of an engine designed for marine use not working well in locomotives. (The Paxman Valenta as originally used in the HST 125's being another case...)
The Scottish Greens appear determined to march back to the political fringes where ideological purity smothers pragmatism. If you’re a cosplaying revolutionary from the West End of Glasgow, daydreaming about wandering through Gaza, handling out puberty-blockers to pleading-eyed children, then the Greens are the lads for you.…
Strangely, it is in the interests of both the SNP and its main opponents that Swinney’s government does not fail (unless some scandal of party-destroying proportions should emerge). Neither Anas Sarwar nor Douglas Ross can risk being seen as wreckers for the sake of sport and, if John Swinney maintains his new calm and reasonable persona, it may be difficult for them not to cooperate with him.
As the Scottish Greens shriek themselves into irrelevance, Scotland's future political direction is going to be dictated by those on the centre ground.
When the MP for Dover and Deal was presented to Sir Keir as interested in defection, it is not hard to see why he and the tight group of aides he discussed it with reckoned that this was an offer too salivating to refuse. “ I’m completely fine with it,” says one of the non-squeamish members of the shadow cabinet. “We’ve got an election to win. The name of the game is beating the Tories. When an opportunity like this comes along, you can’t pass it up.” What they did not anticipate was the scale and the intensity of the backlash.
This might have been foreseen because Ms Elphicke has landed in Labour with more baggage than a luggage carousel at Heathrow during the school summer holidays. As for her politics, she once attacked Marcus Rashford for campaigning for free school meals, one of many reasons to doubt whether she has any genuine affinity with her new party.
The broader reason for the unease rippling through Labour’s ranks is that it feeds into the anxiety that there is no compromise with their party’s values that the leadership might not make in pursuit of what it sees as potential electoral advantage. Voters may have a general preference for broad-church parties, but they also tend to like them to come with sturdy walls and some pillars of principle.
What’s not settled, as we approach the election, is a consensus view about Sir Keir. It is still up for argument both within his party and among voters whether he is a firmly anchored leader of genuine conviction, the case made by his allies. Or is he, as enemies to both right and left contend, a ruthless opportunist who will say or do anything to get power? The willingness to clasp hands with someone with the history of Natalie Elphicke is much easier for his foes to explain than it is for his friends.
The next time, if there’s a next time, a Conservative MP of her ilk offers to come over to Labour, Sir Keir might be better advised to say thanks, but no thanks.
Doesn’t Luke 15:11-32 kinda apply?
The parable of the Lost Son.
That shows the lost son a) Leaving home b) Regretting that and repenting. c) Returning in regret.
I don't see Natalie Elphicke as a "lost son of Labour who has repented her reckless, dissolute ways and returned home".
It’s not quite the same, but the parable tells us that it is good to celebrate the one who was lost and has now found their way, over those who piously criticise.
Yes, I'd agree with that. The question is over "found their way", and not being naive. There seems to be an issue around the lobbying of Robert Buckland, for example - it was clear that her former party would tip a bucket of doodoo over her, Bad 'Al style, but was Sit Keir properly aware what was coming? That should guide his actions.
I think what I have said on PB in the past is that the proof of the pudding on conversions can only be over time, since like Elisabeth 1 we can't make windows into men's and women's souls.
Perhaps Matthew 10:16 applies "Be as wise as serpents, and as gentle as doves."
In the case of the lost son, for example, it might not be wise to put him in charge of managing his father's wealth for a few years.
My take on Sir Keir is probably that he deems any potential damage is less for him than the benefits of keeping the Conservatives in confusion and doubt, and he has a stop-loss of NE standing down at the next election.
I think his calculation is quite Machiavellian / cold blooded. After all, he's a lawyer !
I suspect you and @DavidL in his comment just above underestimate Starmer. Fundamentally he's a traditionalist and is motivated by his working class roots. He sees the Red Wall as his kind of people and thinks the Labour Party has abandoned them in recent years. Happily, and this is a very politician thing, he also thinks engaging them is how he's going to win the election.
If he believed university educated social liberals was the way forward would be still be as keen on the Red Wall? Because I think there's a danger in his, I believe deliberately and quite ruthlessly, rejecting liberalism.
Firstly almost his entire party is made up of such people. They will go along with Starmer if he wins them an election but after that?
Secondly graduates are a large and increasingly large demographic looking for a political home. Does he really want to repel them.
Thirdly Starmer is a traditionalist not a populist. The Elphicke defection muddies the distinction.
But I don't think Starmer is triangulating or just saying what people want to hear. If anything he's not triangulating enough
This is a really interesting take and chimes with the Morgan McSweeney profile on Unherd - https://unherd.com/2024/05/the-mcsweeney-project/ (well worth reading, even though Unherd is not a regular destination for me at least)
Certainly Starmer seems more “Labourist” than socialist, progressive, or social democrat, if we’re throwing broad terms around. And there’s a long heritage for that - Hardie and Macdonald were both expressly Labourist rather than socialist.
I kind of think the only long term solution to this is to recognise that Labour’s internal coalition will not hold and that the centre left needs to re-form around two or more parties (which in turn requires PR). But there is absolutely no appetite for that within Labour, and right now the guiding narrative is for people to stick fingers in their ears and hope Starmer will lead them to the promised land. Spoiler: he won’t.
The wish is the father to the thought. As a socially liberal graduate I would prefer the Islington Human Rights lawyer Starmer to the traditionalist working class Starmer. But I am fairly sure he's made a choice and it's not a particularly cynical one in view.
"It is time to abolish the two-child benefit cap There is an urgent need to reform a welfare system that does not incentivise work and punishes the poor Suella Braverman"
The only hope the Tories have is that the public recoil in horror when they see how wooden and insincere Sir Keir is during the campaign. This clip from yesterday gives me some encouragement it could happen.
Have you ever met anyone in real life who is this unnatural? Reminds me of Theresa May at her most awkward
And the Union Jack in the corner of the room. We are Unionists to the core but, weirdly, none of our rooms are decorated with a Union Jack.
People in this country, correctly, lament the choice in the US being between Biden and Trump but we are really not much better.
Everything about him is so obviously scripted & phoney. He is being PR’d to within an inch of his life, but doesn’t have the warmth or charm to pull it off. I realise I am very biased here, as have a real dislike of him, but trying to be objective, surely the public will wince along with me when he’s all over our screens with that Partridge rictus grin come Election time?
I know someone who has met him on a few occasions and had to drive him around - he's apparently really nice. I wanted him to be an absolute twat. I still think he's absolutely not what the UK needs.
I suppose every time I see him he is putting on a performance as this whiter than white, pious anti Boris, and he’s just not a very good actor, so he looks stilted and insincere.
Perfectly possible that he’s nice company when he’s chatting about the weather or what he’s having for dinner.
He is apparently a genuine football fan, and I’ve no reason to disbelieve it, yet when asked who should play up front for England in the World Cup he sounded like someone who was reading post it notes from SPADs
Going back to the Eurovision for a bit and the voting figures displayed by RAI at the end of Semi Final 2. It now looks like they were not correct for some of the minor places so it could have been as RAI later said, some partial results.
Israel (leak 1st, actual 1st) Netherlands (leak 2nd, actual 2nd) Switzerland (leak 5th, actual 3rd) Armenia (leak 6th, actual 4th) Greece (leak 7th, actual 5th) Georgia (leak 4th, actual 6th) Albania (leak 3rd, actual 7th) Estonia (leak 12th, actual 8th) Czechia (leak 13th, actual 9th) San Marino (leak 8th, actual 10th)
My working theory on the changes would be that any organised diaspora vote like Israel, Albania, San Marino (San Marino isn't a diaspora, but because SMR doesn't have their own phone system, they can vote in the Italy televote) would get in their votes early as they aren't going to be deliberating over which country to vote for and the partial results might have been from early on. It's possible that Israel's 40%+ that moved the odds so much might have been a more normal 20-25% by the end of voting.
Labour majority is nailed on but the size of that majority is very much up for grabs and could well affect the election after the next one.
Id agree there. 50 seat majority and imo theyll get mauled in 2029, 150 seat majority and its a 10 year reich minimum Edit - my own projected range at the moment is 50 to 150 weighted slightly to the lower figure
I'm pretty sure the Labour majority, if there is one, will be below 100.
The size of the majority, though, has no bearing on the length of the reich IMHO.
Agreed, though what replaces it if Starmer disappoints?
All the signs point towards a Tory party that will be unelectable in 5 years.
IMO we will be facing a particular risk of a Trump-like non-politician populist in 5 years time.
Yeah, but all the signs don't point that way, do they?
That's projection based on past experience and wishful thinking.
The wishful thinking being “Major didn’t win because we weren’t conservative enough” or “Miliband didn’t win because we weren’t socialist enough” or ditto for Callaghan. So all these wishful thinkers have to be proved wrong, in real time, before normal service can resume. It might be past experience but it is also a recurring pattern.
Yes, that's my point: it's projection based on past experience. In one case, an example from over 25 years ago and another from almost 45 years ago when politics was totally different.
It holds no certainties about what may happen in the future and is just one of many scenarios which, in any case, will be heavily contingent on all sorts of unrelated events entirely beyond the peccadillos of ordinary party members and MPs.
True, but for the pattern to be broken does rely on the Tories - who have been self-obsessed incompetent numpties for years now - suddenly becoming sensible and self-aware. I am not sure that is going to be a value bet.
Per detailed results on Wiki - the top 3 in the public vote was very close. Switzerland (overall winner) was 5th.
Public vote:
Croatia - 337 Israel - 323 Ukraine - 307 France - 227 Switzerland - 226
However in the public vote, 15 countries gave Israel 12 points, whereas only 9 countries gave Croatia 12 points. But Croatia got more points in total suggesting its support was more consistent.
Comments
My calculations have it as the single most cost-effective way to bring children out of poverty (including absolute). A relatively cheap game changer.
Credit where credit is due.
It holds no certainties about what may happen in the future and is just one of many scenarios which, in any case, will be heavily contingent on all sorts of unrelated events entirely beyond the peccadillos of ordinary party members and MPs.
Why oh why oh why is there a repeated failure to talk about the role of Tehran being the instigator in all of this and much else in the region?
Perfectly possible that he’s nice company when he’s chatting about the weather or what he’s having for dinner.
He is apparently a genuine football fan, and I’ve no reason to disbelieve it, yet when asked who should play up front for England in the World Cup he sounded like someone who was reading post it notes from SPADs
https://x.com/asfarasdelgados/status/1583374767653994501?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
It's just got up to 25 here in SW London. Next week looks cooler with rain, typical.
He seems frozen by fear in interviews and I think this will damage him in the campaign, but he probably has a big enough lead in the polls to ride that out anyway.
Now, all please rise for a viewing of the Holy Trinity
Scrolling the map across to the USA gives a good scepticism-building picture.
Missing is any measure of the amount of energy being used per pop, or imports / exports.
(Runs for cover...)
Strangely, it is in the interests of both the SNP and its main opponents that Swinney’s government does not fail (unless some scandal of party-destroying proportions should emerge). Neither Anas Sarwar nor Douglas Ross can risk being seen as wreckers for the sake of sport and, if John Swinney maintains his new calm and reasonable persona, it may be difficult for them not to cooperate with him.
As the Scottish Greens shriek themselves into irrelevance, Scotland's future political direction is going to be dictated by those on the centre ground.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/columnists/euan-mccolm-the-greens-retreat-shrieking-to-the-fringes-amid-sanctimony-and-hypocrisy-over-kate-forbes-4624656
Israel (leak 1st, actual 1st)
Netherlands (leak 2nd, actual 2nd)
Switzerland (leak 5th, actual 3rd)
Armenia (leak 6th, actual 4th)
Greece (leak 7th, actual 5th)
Georgia (leak 4th, actual 6th)
Albania (leak 3rd, actual 7th)
Estonia (leak 12th, actual 8th)
Czechia (leak 13th, actual 9th)
San Marino (leak 8th, actual 10th)
My working theory on the changes would be that any organised diaspora vote like Israel, Albania, San Marino (San Marino isn't a diaspora, but because SMR doesn't have their own phone system, they can vote in the Italy televote) would get in their votes early as they aren't going to be deliberating over which country to vote for and the partial results might have been from early on. It's possible that Israel's 40%+ that moved the odds so much might have been a more normal 20-25% by the end of voting.