The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:
Ashfield. Barnsley South Boston & Skegness. Broadland and Fakenham. Burton and Uttoxeter. Cannock Chase Clacton. Cotswold North. Fareham and Waterlooville. Gosport. Great Yarmouth. Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes) Louth and Horncastle. Orpington. Plymouth Moor View. Skipton and Ripon. Suffolk South. Washington and Gateshead South.
Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
Yes some bonkers results there.
I’m not immediately pouring cold water on Reform getting that number of seats - they theoretically could though I think highly unlikely - but if I had to pick 18, a good 12-14 of those don’t look like the ones I’d choose.
I note in the Economist version IoW West goes Reform. I think that MRP models break down on such extreme swings in individual seats. A probalistic method might be closer.
IOW E is more likely to do so than West. The detail of that economist model suggests it may well be very flaky.
A country that votes approximate 33% for centre/right parties is not going to sustain for long a Labour vs Lib Dem main battle. FPTP or no FPTP.
Reform and the Tories would merge under FPTP if the LDs were ahead of them both on seats, it would just be a matter of time. Only PR would keep them separate parties as they could win much more seats that reflect their voteshare with PR than FPTP even if they still divide the right of centre vote
If the Tories merge with Farage's Reform then any decent Tory MPs would have little choice but to cross the floor to the Lib Dems or someone else.
A handful might but the vast majority of the Tory membership and most of the parliamentary party and donors would go over and join with Farage's party.
Indeed on the worst of the MRPs most of the wet Tory MPs from Remain or soft Leave southern seats would have already lost their seats to the LDs anyway. The remaining Tory MPs would overwhelmingly be in strong Leave seats and mainly rural constituencies and would find an alliance with Farage no major problem as their voters in their seats would have similar views to him.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv) is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
How many other countries are entitled to invade their neighbours to right a 'historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for vengeance' ?
None, but it happens and they get away with it when they are too big to stop without unacceptable consequences. See China/Tibet for example.
Or India /Goa.
Yet stopping Russia taking over Ukraine has had very acceptable consequences in destroying Russia's military and damaging its economy.
All for the cost of a few billion to western countries.
Now I suspect that back in 2022 you would have opposed any military aid to Ukraine with the same 'reasoning' that you are now using that Russia must be given what it wants.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
Just a reminder that the entirety of the oblasts voted to be part of independent Ukraine in the only free vote on the subject.
Happy image from my evening. Victoria Tap, Manchester. Three old ladies. Well dressed old ladies, but dressed like old ladies used to dress: smart floral dresses. Glasses of white wine in front of them. Break off from.their earnest and animated conversation to sing along lustily as tge Zombies' "She's not there" comes on over the speakers. Which I suppose is the same vintage they are, but rather cooler than what you would normally exoect women in their late 70s and 80s be into. Good grief it's late. Then back to their conversation. Clearly Talking Heads doesn't catch their imagination the same way.
Another 0-0 being ground out on the telly. Good grief football is turgid.
The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:
Ashfield. Barnsley South Boston & Skegness. Broadland and Fakenham. Burton and Uttoxeter. Cannock Chase Clacton. Cotswold North. Fareham and Waterlooville. Gosport. Great Yarmouth. Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes) Louth and Horncastle. Orpington. Plymouth Moor View. Skipton and Ripon. Suffolk South. Washington and Gateshead South.
Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
Yes some bonkers results there.
I’m not immediately pouring cold water on Reform getting that number of seats - they theoretically could though I think highly unlikely - but if I had to pick 18, a good 12-14 of those don’t look like the ones I’d choose.
I note in the Economist version IoW West goes Reform. I think that MRP models break down on such extreme swings in individual seats. A probalistic method might be closer.
IOW E is more likely to do so than West. The detail of that economist model suggests it may well be very flaky.
A particularly bonkers Reform candidate in E, but an interesting split of 3 or even more parties.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
It's hard to tell, for obvious reasons, but I doubt that pro-Russian sentiment in Russian-occupied Ukraine is as strong as pro-British sentiment in Northern Ireland.
Crimea 100% certain pro russian. Think county Down or Antrim if the inhabitants of West Belfast had been sent packing at partition
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
I’m unconvinced by these MRPs. In fact, I’m going from unconvinced to downright sceptical.
I think I’m going to return to national polls only and stay measured. I’ll stick with my prediction:
Lab 39 Con 25 LibDem 15 Ref 14 Green 4
Conservatives on 140 seats. Labour majority 160
even at the higher end of the polling position of the Tories they're losing 45 to 50% of their 2019 GB votes. it's unlike anything that has happened since the collapse of the Liberal party after the first world war. FPTP makes things really hard to predict.
with all of the polls (MRP and regular) there's a margin of error which people forget about which means that the MRPs have somewhere in the region of 100 seats which are essentially tossup for a party or too close to call. but you have to dig into the data to see that.
Analysis of Greek prehistoric combat in full body armour based on physiological principles: A series of studies using thematic analysis, human experiments, and numerical simulations
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0301494 One of the oldest complete suits of European armour was discovered in 1960 near the village of Dendra, in Southern Greece, but it remained unknown whether this armour was suitable for extended use in battle or was purely ceremonial. This had limited our understanding of the ancient Greek–Late Bronze Age–warfare and its consequences that have underpinned the social transformations of prehistoric Europe and Eastern Mediterranean. In a series of archeo-physiological studies, merging knowledge in archaeology, history, human physiology, and numerical simulation, we provide supporting evidence that the Mycenaean armour found at Dendra was entirely compatible with use in extended combat, and we provide a free software enabling simulation of Late Bronze Age warfare. A group of special armed-forces personnel wearing a replica of the Dendra armour were able to complete an 11-hour simulated Late Bronze Age combat protocol that we developed from a series of studies based on the available evidence. Numerical simulation of the thermal exchanges in Late Bronze Age warfare extended this conclusion across different environmental conditions and fighting intensities. Our results support the notion that the Mycenaeans had such a powerful impact in Eastern Mediterranean at least partly as a result of their armour technology…
… As no historical accounts or descriptions survive from the Greek Late Bronze Age regarding the scope and use of armour of the Dendra type, we turned to a key–and only–detailed early account of warfare, battle, and single combat: Homer’s epic account of 10 days in the Trojan War, the Iliad. …
18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.
I agree; but if it did turn out that way (i.e. LD 71 C 60 R 18) would the prospect of being able to grab "official opposition" status back from the LDs make a merger wih Reform seem too attractive to decline for whoever is controlling the Tory party at that point?
I think if the Tories are reduced to below 100, which is likely, then whether Reform get 1 seat or 18 only matters in terms of negotiating position - whoever leads the Tories at that point will probably be desperate for merger or alliance.
As some speculate it might cost them a few Wets, but in terms of voter base it would probably be much larger.
However this is two scorpions in a small cage. How keen will sane Tories be to negotiate a deal with a Potemkin party who (a) ran candidates who publicly fellow travelled with fascists and (b) ensured the demolition of the Tories. The aftermath and lattermath won't be dull.
What would m be the Constitutional position if Labour supported the LD nomination of Ed Davey as LOTO if the Tories tried to subvert the outcome by merging with Reform?
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
It's hard to tell, for obvious reasons, but I doubt that pro-Russian sentiment in Russian-occupied Ukraine is as strong as pro-British sentiment in Northern Ireland.
Crimea 100% certain pro russian. Think county Down or Antrim if the inhabitants of West Belfast had been sent packing at partition
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
These are results that you are looking for. Every single oblast voted for independence in 1991 it wasn't even close anywhere but crimea.
The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:
Ashfield. Barnsley South Boston & Skegness. Broadland and Fakenham. Burton and Uttoxeter. Cannock Chase Clacton. Cotswold North. Fareham and Waterlooville. Gosport. Great Yarmouth. Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes) Louth and Horncastle. Orpington. Plymouth Moor View. Skipton and Ripon. Suffolk South. Washington and Gateshead South.
Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
Yes some bonkers results there.
I’m not immediately pouring cold water on Reform getting that number of seats - they theoretically could though I think highly unlikely - but if I had to pick 18, a good 12-14 of those don’t look like the ones I’d choose.
I note in the Economist version IoW West goes Reform. I think that MRP models break down on such extreme swings in individual seats. A probalistic method might be closer.
IOW E is more likely to do so than West. The detail of that economist model suggests it may well be very flaky.
The LD candidate there apparently has a reasonable local following. Though he was once a Green it seems. Conceivably he might take some of what would otherwise be Labour votes - I can't see Reform though really.
The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:
Ashfield. Barnsley South Boston & Skegness. Broadland and Fakenham. Burton and Uttoxeter. Cannock Chase Clacton. Cotswold North. Fareham and Waterlooville. Gosport. Great Yarmouth. Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes) Louth and Horncastle. Orpington. Plymouth Moor View. Skipton and Ripon. Suffolk South. Washington and Gateshead South.
Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
Yes some bonkers results there.
I’m not immediately pouring cold water on Reform getting that number of seats - they theoretically could though I think highly unlikely - but if I had to pick 18, a good 12-14 of those don’t look like the ones I’d choose.
I note in the Economist version IoW West goes Reform. I think that MRP models break down on such extreme swings in individual seats. A probalistic method might be closer.
IOW E is more likely to do so than West. The detail of that economist model suggests it may well be very flaky.
A particularly bonkers Reform candidate in E, but an interesting split of 3 or even more parties.
She’s actually coming over reasonably well (noting the base of low expectations), and has a lot of support on social media
"Readers added context they thought people might want to know The Conservative Government have been in power since 2010 and have raised overall taxes to their highest level since 1948."
Doesn't mean readers don't want to know a Labour Government that will take power in 2024 will raise them further to their highest level since 1713.
So the biggest Reform shares are now with YG, Redfield and Whitestone Insight, the rest are herding 15
Or, alternatively, Farage's fanboism has resulted in the number of people choosing to go Reform falling back somewhat.
It is - of course - entirely possible there is some shy Reform support out there. It is also entirely possible that on election day, many Reform voters decide to vote Conservative because they see that as the best way of preventing Starmer from getting too big a majority, or because they hate the LibDems more than the Conservatives.
We'll find out in eight days time.
To introduce a wholly novel subject, we won't know anything much in 8 days time. 8 days time is next Thursday afternoon/early evening. We will know what make of dogs are on show at polling stations, and we shall have read 8 days more of PB which, in the case of this election, will entertain and amuse but we shall be neither wiser nor better informed. 9 days time might be different.
"Readers added context they thought people might want to know The Conservative Government have been in power since 2010 and have raised overall taxes to their highest level since 1948."
Doesn't mean readers don't want to know a Labour Government that will take power in 2024 will raise them further to their highest level since 1713.
People are probably as much interested in why we’re paying so much yet everything is still crap.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
It's hard to tell, for obvious reasons, but I doubt that pro-Russian sentiment in Russian-occupied Ukraine is as strong as pro-British sentiment in Northern Ireland.
Crimea 100% certain pro russian. Think county Down or Antrim if the inhabitants of West Belfast had been sent packing at partition
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
These are results that you are looking for. Every single oblast voted for independence in 1991 it wasn't even close anywhere but crimea.
So might every county of Ireland if one had been arranged by the victorious Germans in the aftermath of UK losing World War 1, and subsequent economic the collapse, with the collapse of healthcare, abrupt ending of welfare and pensions etc etc.
I’m in Audierne. it’s a long long way from the Paris-sur-la-plage of Belle Ile. No pink shorts here. No elegant roundabouts, indeed a hint of actual poverty 5km inland. Fat people buying even more carbs in Intermarche, lots of shuttered shops
However it is still lovely and I have found a sweet cosy bistro that does precisely 7 dishes. In total. That’s my favourite kind of restaurant because - one hopes - they are going to nail them
Ins’allah!
They’re off to a great start with home made crisps with a hint of curry flavour. Average wine tho
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
That’s a solved problem. Any Libyans who get plutonium will hire that loony scientist with the DeLorean. Who’ll steal the plutonium and give them a collection of used pinball machine parts instead.
"Readers added context they thought people might want to know The Conservative Government have been in power since 2010 and have raised overall taxes to their highest level since 1948."
Doesn't mean readers don't want to know a Labour Government that will take power in 2024 will raise them further to their highest level since 1713.
People are probably as much interested in why we’re paying so much yet everything is still crap.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.
Given your (correct imo) assessment of Farage as a grubby little racist it still surprises me that you voted for him in 2019. Ok, the Euro elections, but still. I would have thought no nose-peg could have been quite strong enough.
I voted for him to be ousted from [the European] Parliament, not elected into it.
And Theresa "Go Home" May was not much of a better alternative.
Yes I know the thinking. But I also know if I despised a politician as much as you do Nigel Farage, considered him a vile racist, I would need an unbelievably compelling reason to vote for them in any election under any circumstances. I guess your dislike of our EU membership was so strong as to be that reason. Quite something really when you think about it. And never again, one hopes.
Not my dislike of the EU, I was torn whether to vote Leave or Remain until the last minute and had entered the campaign backing Remain but was won over by Richard_Tyndall, Casino_Royale and others.
My desire to get him removed from Parliament, Theresa May removed as PM, as well as my belief in democracy and that having made a decision to Leave in 2016 that decision should be respected.
But yes it was absolutely sui generis and never again.
Sounds like your vote for Nigel Farage was in your mind a vote against Nigel Farage then. Interesting way of looking at it. We were just talking earlier about "thinking outside the box". Good example right here.
And in next week's episode of "Justification", black will be white, up will be down and water will be dry....
So the biggest Reform shares are now with YG, Redfield and Whitestone Insight, the rest are herding 15
Or, alternatively, Farage's fanboism has resulted in the number of people choosing to go Reform falling back somewhat.
It is - of course - entirely possible there is some shy Reform support out there. It is also entirely possible that on election day, many Reform voters decide to vote Conservative because they see that as the best way of preventing Starmer from getting too big a majority, or because they hate the LibDems more than the Conservatives.
We'll find out in eight days time.
To introduce a wholly novel subject, we won't know anything much in 8 days time. 8 days time is next Thursday afternoon/early evening. We will know what make of dogs are on show at polling stations, and we shall have read 8 days more of PB which, in the case of this election, will entertain and amuse but we shall be neither wiser nor better informed. 9 days time might be different.
Well, we'll know you're a socialist enabler and one of Starmer's useful idiots. You'll have five years struggling to sleep and not look yourself in the eye in the mirror.
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
I like a good PB quiz but @Casino_Royale is right, there are far too many questions. Ten max? Six or eight is ideal
Have another go, this feels like actual work, but the idea is good
18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.
Given your (correct imo) assessment of Farage as a grubby little racist it still surprises me that you voted for him in 2019. Ok, the Euro elections, but still. I would have thought no nose-peg could have been quite strong enough.
I voted for him to be ousted from [the European] Parliament, not elected into it.
And Theresa "Go Home" May was not much of a better alternative.
Yes I know the thinking. But I also know if I despised a politician as much as you do Nigel Farage, considered him a vile racist, I would need an unbelievably compelling reason to vote for them in any election under any circumstances. I guess your dislike of our EU membership was so strong as to be that reason. Quite something really when you think about it. And never again, one hopes.
Not my dislike of the EU, I was torn whether to vote Leave or Remain until the last minute and had entered the campaign backing Remain but was won over by Richard_Tyndall, Casino_Royale and others.
My desire to get him removed from Parliament, Theresa May removed as PM, as well as my belief in democracy and that having made a decision to Leave in 2016 that decision should be respected.
But yes it was absolutely sui generis and never again.
Sounds like your vote for Nigel Farage was in your mind a vote against Nigel Farage then. Interesting way of looking at it. We were just talking earlier about "thinking outside the box". Good example right here.
Yes, it was a vote that got him out of Parliament. He's a has-been now who is not an elected representative.
Good riddance.
Odd (in a good way) to hear a passionate Leaver describe that EU talking shop as "Parliament", one word capital P.
But as for "has been" I'm afraid he looks good for Clacton. Which would put him (for the first time) in the Mother of all.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv) is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
How many other countries are entitled to invade their neighbours to right a 'historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for vengeance' ?
None, but it happens and they get away with it when they are too big to stop without unacceptable consequences. See China/Tibet for example.
Or India /Goa.
Yet stopping Russia taking over Ukraine has had very acceptable consequences in destroying Russia's military and damaging its economy.
All for the cost of a few billion to western countries.
Now I suspect that back in 2022 you would have opposed any military aid to Ukraine with the same 'reasoning' that you are now using that Russia must be given what it wants.
I’m launching the Really Real Really Reclaim Party.
We want the Angevin Empire plus the Treaty of Troyes. As a start.
The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:
Ashfield. Barnsley South Boston & Skegness. Broadland and Fakenham. Burton and Uttoxeter. Cannock Chase Clacton. Cotswold North. Fareham and Waterlooville. Gosport. Great Yarmouth. Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes) Louth and Horncastle. Orpington. Plymouth Moor View. Skipton and Ripon. Suffolk South. Washington and Gateshead South.
Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
Yes some bonkers results there.
I’m not immediately pouring cold water on Reform getting that number of seats - they theoretically could though I think highly unlikely - but if I had to pick 18, a good 12-14 of those don’t look like the ones I’d choose.
I note in the Economist version IoW West goes Reform. I think that MRP models break down on such extreme swings in individual seats. A probalistic method might be closer.
IOW E is more likely to do so than West. The detail of that economist model suggests it may well be very flaky.
A particularly bonkers Reform candidate in E, but an interesting split of 3 or even more parties.
She’s actually coming over reasonably well (noting the base of low expectations), and has a lot of support on social media
67 on Bet365.
How's the Lab candidate going down? Not to everyone's taste I imagine.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
It's hard to tell, for obvious reasons, but I doubt that pro-Russian sentiment in Russian-occupied Ukraine is as strong as pro-British sentiment in Northern Ireland.
Crimea 100% certain pro russian. Think county Down or Antrim if the inhabitants of West Belfast had been sent packing at partition
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
These are results that you are looking for. Every single oblast voted for independence in 1991 it wasn't even close anywhere but crimea.
So might every county of Ireland if one had been arranged by the victorious Germans in the aftermath of UK losing World War 1, and subsequent economic the collapse, with the collapse of healthcare, abrupt ending of welfare and pensions etc etc.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
It's hard to tell, for obvious reasons, but I doubt that pro-Russian sentiment in Russian-occupied Ukraine is as strong as pro-British sentiment in Northern Ireland.
Crimea 100% certain pro russian. Think county Down or Antrim if the inhabitants of West Belfast had been sent packing at partition
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
These are results that you are looking for. Every single oblast voted for independence in 1991 it wasn't even close anywhere but crimea.
So might every county of Ireland if one had been arranged by the victorious Germans in the aftermath of UK losing World War 1, and subsequent economic the collapse, with the collapse of healthcare, abrupt ending of welfare and pensions etc etc.
Erm...the vast majority of counties in Ireland did vote for independence after the end of WW1 and the UK didn't even lose.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
It's hard to tell, for obvious reasons, but I doubt that pro-Russian sentiment in Russian-occupied Ukraine is as strong as pro-British sentiment in Northern Ireland.
Crimea 100% certain pro russian. Think county Down or Antrim if the inhabitants of West Belfast had been sent packing at partition
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
These are results that you are looking for. Every single oblast voted for independence in 1991 it wasn't even close anywhere but crimea.
So might every county of Ireland if one had been arranged by the victorious Germans in the aftermath of UK losing World War 1, and subsequent economic the collapse, with the collapse of healthcare, abrupt ending of welfare and pensions etc etc.
That's.... an odd comparison to make.
Perhaps, just perhaps, Ukrainians wanted to be out of the Soviet Union? And given the way they're fighting the fascist, imperialist Russians, it seems they still do.
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
It's hard to tell, for obvious reasons, but I doubt that pro-Russian sentiment in Russian-occupied Ukraine is as strong as pro-British sentiment in Northern Ireland.
Crimea 100% certain pro russian. Think county Down or Antrim if the inhabitants of West Belfast had been sent packing at partition
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
These are results that you are looking for. Every single oblast voted for independence in 1991 it wasn't even close anywhere but crimea.
So might every county of Ireland if one had been arranged by the victorious Germans in the aftermath of UK losing World War 1, and subsequent economic the collapse, with the collapse of healthcare, abrupt ending of welfare and pensions etc etc.
Erm...the vast majority of counties in Ireland did vote for independence after the end of WW1 and the UK didn't even lose.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
I've scrutinised the challenger against the incumbent.
The incumbent loses on every single metric.
Your party has given me no reason to vote for it. It has given me several, very personal, reasons to want to bury it 12 feet in the ground.
18 Reform seats seems far too high, I have more faith in the country that it won't vote in that many Quislings.
I agree; but if it did turn out that way (i.e. LD 71 C 60 R 18) would the prospect of being able to grab "official opposition" status back from the LDs make a merger wih Reform seem too attractive to decline for whoever is controlling the Tory party at that point?
I think if the Tories are reduced to below 100, which is likely, then whether Reform get 1 seat or 18 only matters in terms of negotiating position - whoever leads the Tories at that point will probably be desperate for merger or alliance.
As some speculate it might cost them a few Wets, but in terms of voter base it would probably be much larger.
However this is two scorpions in a small cage. How keen will sane Tories be to negotiate a deal with a Potemkin party who (a) ran candidates who publicly fellow travelled with fascists and (b) ensured the demolition of the Tories. The aftermath and lattermath won't be dull.
What would m be the Constitutional position if Labour supported the LD nomination of Ed Davey as LOTO if the Tories tried to subvert the outcome by merging with Reform?
SFAICS the constitutional position is that the question (who is LOTO and which party is HMLO) is handed to the speaker to fix; also, SFAICS, a question like that has never arisen in modern times, and also that it is almost certainly non-justiciable (can't go to court about it, though you can always make an application to a court to argue justiciability).
The speaker would take advice before deciding, and the great and good would unite behind him. The PM, with about 500 MPs behind him in hastily acquired ill fitting suits, won't care less and will back the speaker.
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
Shall we start with the IFS who saying there is an £18bn hole created by Hunt that needs to be filled. How are the Tory party going to actually do that?
You don't have to be a Putin fan to accept that no one is going to evict him from the six counties oblasts (five in Ukraine plus Transdinistra) any time soon and an armistice with partition, then support to make it stick a la South Korea is better than continuing the slaughter and risking it escalating further, and being of the view that interfering in other countries affairs on sanctimonious moral grounds often disguising vested interests (Ukraine 2014, Libya 2011, Iraq 2003, Afghanistan 2003-2022, Iran 1953 ends up causing far worse problems than the ones they were intended to resolve.
Remember: invading is usually the easy part.
And it's the occupation that usually kills you.
Those Oblasts will be a constant resource drain on the Russian economy, in terms of men and material, and they will produce bugger all tax revenue.
And all the time, Russia will grow economically weaker. It is utterly dependent on energy exports, and it has completely fucked itself.
And it is hard to consider but Putin will die. He might be like my dad and think he won't, but he will. And the world will be a better place.
You are joking?
Whoever replaces Putin will be far worse (if we are lucky he might be less skilled at the art of politics (unless less skilled in the Kaiser Bill sense).
One reason Putin went in in 2022 was becsause it was a domestic issue big enough that he might have been vulnerable to hardliners if he didn't.
And so we get closer to house in the Russia talking points bingo. “Whoever succeeds Putin will be worse!” Tell that to Ukrainians being subjected to all out war and the attempted obliteration of their country and culture.
Seriously, that is straight from the textbook. And if you follow the history of deposed or naturally dying tyrants, most of the time it’s bogus.
You can presumably point to some solid indications that if Putin falls, he will be replaced by a nice, moderate pro-Westerner? Or perhaps some case studies of other nasty dictators that the West has toppled recently leading to the establishment of a nice, pro-Western peace-loving democracy? Or do people just keep saying it because it's not a bad best guess?
That’s Russia’s business, not Tim’s. Which was his point, if you didn’t get it.
If we end up with Libya, except with nukes, that's everyone's business - that is everyone sane's point, in case you're struggling.
Or 1930s Germany with Nukes.
That's effectively what we have now you pillock. Putin's already tried his version of annexing the Sudatenland, only with more violence.
No we don't. Putin is Ruthless, patient, Cold and Calculating. Hitler was a nutter liable to make crazy decisions in a fit of rage if crossed.
Hitler would probably have nuked Kiev after the Kerch Bridge was attacked.
Putin is a nutter too, who believes his own garbage and spin.
A calculating leader would never have made such a horrendous mistake as to invade Ukraine.
All long term leaders suffer from too many people feeding them bullshit because they think that is what they want to hear.
In Russia, Ukrainan control of Crimea and Donbass (and the coast to Odesa and Kharkiv is seen by many in the same light as Alsace-Lorraine was with France from 1870 to 1918, a historic monumental wrong crying out to heaven for venegance.
Putin never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity. He has by his actions created a Ukranian nationalist consciousness in places that never had it before, and earned the permanent opposition of Russian speaking Ukranians.
In very much the same way that British actions over the 1916 Easter rising and the Black and Tans created Nationalist Ireland.
But doubled down in the six Oblasts Counties.
Its going to end up with Ulster type partition.
And yes just as much strong feelings on both sides of that partition.
Thats just reality.
It's hard to tell, for obvious reasons, but I doubt that pro-Russian sentiment in Russian-occupied Ukraine is as strong as pro-British sentiment in Northern Ireland.
Crimea 100% certain pro russian. Think county Down or Antrim if the inhabitants of West Belfast had been sent packing at partition
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
These are results that you are looking for. Every single oblast voted for independence in 1991 it wasn't even close anywhere but crimea.
So might every county of Ireland if one had been arranged by the victorious Germans in the aftermath of UK losing World War 1, and subsequent economic the collapse, with the collapse of healthcare, abrupt ending of welfare and pensions etc etc.
Do... do you think Ukraine was forced to hold a referendum against their will by some victorious invading army?
Quiz question: who was the 3rd country to recognise Ukraine's independence after Poland and Canada?
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
I've scrutinised the challenger against the incumbent.
The incumbent loses on every single metric.
Your party has given me no reason to vote for it. It has given me several, very personal, reasons to want to bury it 12 feet in the ground.
Then, that's an OTT emotional and illogical reaction.
At this point the remaining Tories here are doing a Labour 2019 and lying and then telling the voters they are wrong. You're letting SKS get away with it.
Norstat the best poll of the today for the Conservatives with the party up three and Reform down four.
The two with fieldwork including today aren't far apart but with tonight's debate we are still a long way from polling concensus.
If polling can only really cope with ‘normal’, predictable scenarios, you begin to wonder what the point of it is?
People are only casual to the wild flailing around of the various poll companies because Labour is so far ahead that the outcome is the same in all of them. If we had this level of polling variation in a close election, the media would be full of stories about polling conflict and clueless pollsters.
Of course he wouldn't! Chicken and egg scenario. Those who win under FPTP want to keep FPTP
We recently had a chance to make a crucial reform (AV) which would have been the only change needed to gradually unlock the system and make FPTP work, and said no. I voted for it. Tough.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
Shall we start with the IFS who saying there is an £18bn hole created by Hunt that needs to be filled. How are the Tory party going to actually do that?
Challenge YOUR LOT. Labour.
*L-a-b-o-u-r*
I'm sick and tired of zero scrutiny being applied to their bullshit this campaign. It's a complete dereliction of duty by the press and the curious voter.
They are going to waltz into office without any questioning whatsoever.
If you don't put them on the spot you can't make any complaints whatsoever about what they subsequently do in office. Because you didn't give a shit.
The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:
Ashfield. Barnsley South Boston & Skegness. Broadland and Fakenham. Burton and Uttoxeter. Cannock Chase Clacton. Cotswold North. Fareham and Waterlooville. Gosport. Great Yarmouth. Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes) Louth and Horncastle. Orpington. Plymouth Moor View. Skipton and Ripon. Suffolk South. Washington and Gateshead South.
Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
Yes some bonkers results there.
I’m not immediately pouring cold water on Reform getting that number of seats - they theoretically could though I think highly unlikely - but if I had to pick 18, a good 12-14 of those don’t look like the ones I’d choose.
I note in the Economist version IoW West goes Reform. I think that MRP models break down on such extreme swings in individual seats. A probalistic method might be closer.
IOW E is more likely to do so than West. The detail of that economist model suggests it may well be very flaky.
A particularly bonkers Reform candidate in E, but an interesting split of 3 or even more parties.
She’s actually coming over reasonably well (noting the base of low expectations), and has a lot of support on social media
67 on Bet365.
How's the Lab candidate going down? Not to everyone's taste I imagine.
No. And leaving aside the nature of her selection and the obvious, she’s a really dull, uninspiring performer in public, as well. Labour’s best chance is to hide her away and hope to get in on national swing.
Last week of the campaign starts in 4 and a bit hours!
I think you’re right by the way about LibDems. 15% is a bit too high.
I could be wrong too! We will soon see. I'd expect their polling average to creep up as minds are made up if they are going to seriously advance from 2015 to 19 in vote share
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
I've scrutinised the challenger against the incumbent.
The incumbent loses on every single metric.
Your party has given me no reason to vote for it. It has given me several, very personal, reasons to want to bury it 12 feet in the ground.
Then, that's an OTT emotional and illogical reaction.
And, you'll pay for it.
I've paid for the incompetence of the Tories who have made it clear they don't want my vote. I'm paying taxes through the nose despite the vilification and sneering of your party. If the Tories win God knows what they will do to people like me and you. I just want to be left alone by the government but the blues keep sticking their nose in.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
Shall we start with the IFS who saying there is an £18bn hole created by Hunt that needs to be filled. How are the Tory party going to actually do that?
Challenge YOUR LOT. Labour.
*L-a-b-o-u-r*
I'm sick and tired of zero scrutiny being applied to their bullshit this campaign. It's a complete dereliction of duty by the press and the curious voter.
They are going to waltz into office without any questioning whatsoever.
If you don't put them on the spot you can't make any complaints whatsoever about what they subsequently do in office. Because you didn't give a shit.
I’m in Audierne. it’s a long long way from the Paris-sur-la-plage of Belle Ile. No pink shorts here. No elegant roundabouts, indeed a hint of actual poverty 5km inland. Fat people buying even more carbs in Intermarche, lots of shuttered shops
However it is still lovely and I have found a sweet cosy bistro that does precisely 7 dishes. In total. That’s my favourite kind of restaurant because - one hopes - they are going to nail them
Ins’allah!
They’re off to a great start with home made crisps with a hint of curry flavour. Average wine tho
There is something great about the places where the menu is totally limited. One of the things I miss most about Switzerland was the Auberge in each commune. Apart from a couple, both called the Cheval Blanc coincidently, all of them served pretty much two or three dishes.
Mine, the L’Auberge du Soleil never changed. Winter was fondue, fondue des tomates, or steak frites. To start it was green salad or Salade Paysane which was fantastic. chicken livers, croutons, mushrooms, red onions, salad leaves and a raspberry vinaigrette.
Summer the same except that the fondues were swapped out for Raclette or Fillet de Perche (fried lake fish) with fries.
The only thing you really have to decide hard about is the wine. But it worked perfectly. Once or twice a week, lunchtime or evening you knew what you were getting and knew it was great.
"Readers added context they thought people might want to know The Conservative Government have been in power since 2010 and have raised overall taxes to their highest level since 1948."
Doesn't mean readers don't want to know a Labour Government that will take power in 2024 will raise them further to their highest level since 1713.
Great days, Window Tax in full swing. Hearth Tax departed but a happy memory for all those grateful taxpayers. Income Tax, that temporary expedient, 100 years away.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
Shall we start with the IFS who saying there is an £18bn hole created by Hunt that needs to be filled. How are the Tory party going to actually do that?
Challenge YOUR LOT. Labour.
*L-a-b-o-u-r*
I'm sick and tired of zero scrutiny being applied to their bullshit this campaign. It's a complete dereliction of duty by the press and the curious voter.
They are going to waltz into office without any questioning whatsoever.
If you don't put them on the spot you can't make any complaints whatsoever about what they subsequently do in office. Because you didn't give a shit.
You are pathetic. Are you saying that no-one in the country except you has interrogated the Labour manifesto? Seriously? Do you have so little faith in the electorate? You have to realise that you have failed and there is a better option on the table.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
I've scrutinised the challenger against the incumbent.
The incumbent loses on every single metric.
Your party has given me no reason to vote for it. It has given me several, very personal, reasons to want to bury it 12 feet in the ground.
Then, that's an OTT emotional and illogical reaction.
And, you'll pay for it.
I just want to be left alone by the government but the blues keep sticking their nose in.
I've got news for you mate: if that's what you want you're voting for the wrong team.
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
Instead all we are talking about what is a woman working person and which politicians have bet on politics.
The first point he makes is a really tough one. Small business, turn-over taxes are crippling, but for large multi-national businesses, its too easy to avoid profit based taxes. And of course large businesses can not only absorb red tape, it also acts as a moat against smaller challengers.
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
I like a good PB quiz but @Casino_Royale is right, there are far too many questions. Ten max? Six or eight is ideal
Have another go, this feels like actual work, but the idea is good
No, it'a good. It seems a lot but the questions require thought rather than research and can therefore be done more quickly than many such competitions. Try it. Not least cos several of us have already entered.
Countdown to the BBC debate. Sunaks last chance! Starmer is going to wipe the floor with him. BBC will be impartial and crucify Sunak. Wait...... Someone uninvited is busting in. Farage! Sunak says I will not debate with him. Starmer says the same and they leave. Ed Davey leaves as well. Is he attending? Nige is left to bore for Britian. Make promises he has no intention of keeping. Even his own supporters switch off. It is a hot night. Go to the pub and get pissed is a better idea. Definitely.
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
I like a good PB quiz but @Casino_Royale is right, there are far too many questions. Ten max? Six or eight is ideal
Have another go, this feels like actual work, but the idea is good
Simply GB seats for Lab, LD, Con, Ref, Green, SNP, PC and Ind would make 8 questions (albeit contingent on each other). Another 3 for overall turnout, highest turnout and lowest turnout, 2 for largest and smallest majority makes for a lucky 13.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
Shall we start with the IFS who saying there is an £18bn hole created by Hunt that needs to be filled. How are the Tory party going to actually do that?
Challenge YOUR LOT. Labour.
*L-a-b-o-u-r*
I'm sick and tired of zero scrutiny being applied to their bullshit this campaign. It's a complete dereliction of duty by the press and the curious voter.
They are going to waltz into office without any questioning whatsoever.
If you don't put them on the spot you can't make any complaints whatsoever about what they subsequently do in office. Because you didn't give a shit.
You are pathetic. Are you saying that no-one in the country except you has interrogated the Labour manifesto? Seriously? Do you have so little faith in the electorate? You have to realise that you have failed and there is a better option on the table.
It's not a better option. It's a shitter option.
Starmer will use your vote to bolster the size of his giant strap-on and then royally fuck you in the arse, sans vaseline, laughing all the while, at the "mandate" you've given him.
After 5 years your bum is going to be rather sore. It will possibly need surgery.
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
Happy image from my evening. Victoria Tap, Manchester. Three old ladies. Well dressed old ladies, but dressed like old ladies used to dress: smart floral dresses. Glasses of white wine in front of them. Break off from.their earnest and animated conversation to sing along lustily as tge Zombies' "She's not there" comes on over the speakers. Which I suppose is the same vintage they are, but rather cooler than what you would normally exoect women in their late 70s and 80s be into. Good grief it's late. Then back to their conversation. Clearly Talking Heads doesn't catch their imagination the same way.
Another 0-0 being ground out on the telly. Good grief football is turgid.
The old ladies have moved onto bemoaning the Tories' failure to stop the boats.
"Readers added context they thought people might want to know The Conservative Government have been in power since 2010 and have raised overall taxes to their highest level since 1948."
Doesn't mean readers don't want to know a Labour Government that will take power in 2024 will raise them further to their highest level since 1713.
Great days, Window Tax in full swing. Hearth Tax departed but a happy memory for all those grateful taxpayers. Income Tax, that temporary expedient, 100 years away.
Have another think about it.
You're the one who has to live with your decision.
Ok, just over a week to go, so time to start inking in your answers for the
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
I like a good PB quiz but @Casino_Royale is right, there are far too many questions. Ten max? Six or eight is ideal
Have another go, this feels like actual work, but the idea is good
I'm not changing it since we have some entries already. The questions were crowdsourced on this board, and I already threw dozens away.
So I tell you what, if someone wants to narrow it down to a "lite" version, I'm happy to score the two alongside each other. If someone wants to take charge of picking the questions, let me know what they are. I'll make sure that anybody who's entered the "master" version will also have their answers put into the "apprentice" version.
That was an ELE for the Irish Parliamentary Party...
Question: what was the break point at which Irish independence became inevitable?
Gladstone's third home rule bill? Later?
Gawd, there's a question. If the Third Home Rule Act had been implemented and the Curragh Mutiny had been put down properly instead of indulged and the Easter Rising leaders had been treated leniently, then they may still be here. But that's a chain, not a single event. The ultimate answer may be "The day World War I was declared".
This discussion reminds me, it's time to put the organic kippers on the grill and open some wine to have with them. A dry rose from France. And brown bread and butter.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
Shall we start with the IFS who saying there is an £18bn hole created by Hunt that needs to be filled. How are the Tory party going to actually do that?
Challenge YOUR LOT. Labour.
*L-a-b-o-u-r*
I'm sick and tired of zero scrutiny being applied to their bullshit this campaign. It's a complete dereliction of duty by the press and the curious voter.
They are going to waltz into office without any questioning whatsoever.
If you don't put them on the spot you can't make any complaints whatsoever about what they subsequently do in office. Because you didn't give a shit.
You on the sauce CR?
I think we’re passed the point where people can be scared back to the Conservatives, anyway.
If a late wheel did happen to come off the Labour campaign, a chunk of voters would probably switch to the LibDems and Reform.
"Readers added context they thought people might want to know The Conservative Government have been in power since 2010 and have raised overall taxes to their highest level since 1948."
Doesn't mean readers don't want to know a Labour Government that will take power in 2024 will raise them further to their highest level since 1713.
Great days, Window Tax in full swing. Hearth Tax departed but a happy memory for all those grateful taxpayers. Income Tax, that temporary expedient, 100 years away.
Have another think about it.
You're the one who has to live with your decision.
The 18 reform seats in the Mirror / Baxter MRP are:
Ashfield. Barnsley South Boston & Skegness. Broadland and Fakenham. Burton and Uttoxeter. Cannock Chase Clacton. Cotswold North. Fareham and Waterlooville. Gosport. Great Yarmouth. Huntington. (More Peas John. Oh Yes) Louth and Horncastle. Orpington. Plymouth Moor View. Skipton and Ripon. Suffolk South. Washington and Gateshead South.
Absolute drivel. Just to take one: The Cotswolds voted Remain, Libdems control the council and will be the challengers
Yes some bonkers results there.
I’m not immediately pouring cold water on Reform getting that number of seats - they theoretically could though I think highly unlikely - but if I had to pick 18, a good 12-14 of those don’t look like the ones I’d choose.
I note in the Economist version IoW West goes Reform. I think that MRP models break down on such extreme swings in individual seats. A probalistic method might be closer.
IOW E is more likely to do so than West. The detail of that economist model suggests it may well be very flaky.
I think the Greens might get that one, IOW East. Bit of a hunch I have.
This discussion reminds me, it's time to put the organic kippers on the grill and open some wine to have with them. A dry rose from France. And brown bread and butter.
I bloody love kippers. It is a source of persistent disappointment that B&Bs no longer serve them for breakfast.
Yep - tax appears to be the only thing they have - to which my question is the IFS says there is an £18bn black hole in the Tory manifesto where are the cuts coming from?
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
Shall we start with the IFS who saying there is an £18bn hole created by Hunt that needs to be filled. How are the Tory party going to actually do that?
Challenge YOUR LOT. Labour.
*L-a-b-o-u-r*
I'm sick and tired of zero scrutiny being applied to their bullshit this campaign. It's a complete dereliction of duty by the press and the curious voter.
They are going to waltz into office without any questioning whatsoever.
If you don't put them on the spot you can't make any complaints whatsoever about what they subsequently do in office. Because you didn't give a shit.
You are pathetic. Are you saying that no-one in the country except you has interrogated the Labour manifesto? Seriously? Do you have so little faith in the electorate? You have to realise that you have failed and there is a better option on the table.
It's not a better option. It's a shitter option.
Starmer will use your vote to bolster the size of his giant strap-on and then royally fuck you in the arse, sans vaseline, laughing all the while, at the "mandate" you've given him.
After 5 years your bum is going to be rather sore. It will possibly need surgery.
The Tories should get you to write their eve of poll….
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
Shall we start with the IFS who saying there is an £18bn hole created by Hunt that needs to be filled. How are the Tory party going to actually do that?
Challenge YOUR LOT. Labour.
*L-a-b-o-u-r*
I'm sick and tired of zero scrutiny being applied to their bullshit this campaign. It's a complete dereliction of duty by the press and the curious voter.
They are going to waltz into office without any questioning whatsoever.
If you don't put them on the spot you can't make any complaints whatsoever about what they subsequently do in office. Because you didn't give a shit.
You are pathetic. Are you saying that no-one in the country except you has interrogated the Labour manifesto? Seriously? Do you have so little faith in the electorate? You have to realise that you have failed and there is a better option on the table.
Doug, I'd be amazed if more than one person in a hundred has scrutinised a manifesto of any colour.
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
It's a turnoff for you but the rest of us realise are paying socialist levels of tax with libertarian levels of public service. If we're going to pay we may as well try the real thing. That's why you're losing. Oh, and the fact that from Neil Hamilton to Michelle Mone the Conservative Party has shown for 30 years that it would be prosecuted under the RICO Act if it were incorporated in the USA.
Fucking pathetic.
Scrutinise the challenger.
I've scrutinised the challenger against the incumbent.
The incumbent loses on every single metric.
Your party has given me no reason to vote for it. It has given me several, very personal, reasons to want to bury it 12 feet in the ground.
Then, that's an OTT emotional and illogical reaction.
And, you'll pay for it.
I just want to be left alone by the government but the blues keep sticking their nose in.
I've got news for you mate: if that's what you want you're voting for the wrong team.
Really? Having seen what the Tories offer, and what Labour propose, I'll take my chances over your merry bunch of authoritarian curtain twitchers. There's a reason why most Tory members would pick Farage as your next leader if available. Anyone who values their privacy and freedom, takes a big chance, given your members' recent record of replacing leaders mid-Parliament (i.e. Truss) is insane. Vote for Sunak and get...who exactly?
"Readers added context they thought people might want to know The Conservative Government have been in power since 2010 and have raised overall taxes to their highest level since 1948."
Doesn't mean readers don't want to know a Labour Government that will take power in 2024 will raise them further to their highest level since 1713.
Great days, Window Tax in full swing. Hearth Tax departed but a happy memory for all those grateful taxpayers. Income Tax, that temporary expedient, 100 years away.
Have another think about it.
You're the one who has to live with your decision.
How is your plan to move abroad going?
Wife sceptical, parents don't want me to go.
I couldn't fuck off hard or fast enough given the choice. Which, I'm sure you'd welcome.
I'd probably go for the Canadian paradise. Probably Alberta.
Phil Foden is having his third child at the age of 24. Fair play to him in addressing thr demographic crisis - but it shows what can be done if you don't have to worry about bedrooms or childcare costs.
Comments
Surely some mistake.
Then I am off again on assignment. Helas
Indeed on the worst of the MRPs most of the wet Tory MPs from Remain or soft Leave southern seats would have already lost their seats to the LDs anyway. The remaining Tory MPs would overwhelmingly be in strong Leave seats and mainly rural constituencies and would find an alliance with Farage no major problem as their voters in their seats would have similar views to him.
All for the cost of a few billion to western countries.
Now I suspect that back in 2022 you would have opposed any military aid to Ukraine with the same 'reasoning' that you are now using that Russia must be given what it wants.
Are there any polls or MRPs that support 141 seats or more?
Good grief it's late.
Then back to their conversation. Clearly Talking Heads doesn't catch their imagination the same way.
Another 0-0 being ground out on the telly. Good grief football is turgid.
Donetsk/Luhansk - Londonderry/Armagh - except the Russians don't control the "Bogside" and "South Armagh"
The halves of Zaporizhzhia (without) and Kherson (wjthout) they have. Think Tyrone and Fermanagh. Majority "Republican" but hung on to make the place viable (and land bridge to Crimea).
with all of the polls (MRP and regular) there's a margin of error which people forget about which means that the MRPs have somewhere in the region of 100 seats which are essentially tossup for a party or too close to call. but you have to dig into the data to see that.
Just
So
Glad
Rishi
Sunak
Called
An
Early
Election
To
Wrongfoot
Reform!!!!!
Labour will be a socialist government and they're about to shit right in your lunch.
https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1805989063725285660
What an absolute tool.
However it is still lovely and I have found a sweet cosy bistro that does precisely 7 dishes. In total. That’s my favourite kind of restaurant because - one hopes - they are going to nail them
Ins’allah!
They’re off to a great start with home made crisps with a hint of curry flavour. Average wine tho
Too many questions. GBH of the ears.
They've had none.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlbmRGvLExY
There's still time... don't do it.
The two with fieldwork including today aren't far apart but with tonight's debate we are still a long way from polling concensus.
Have another go, this feels like actual work, but the idea is good
But as for "has been" I'm afraid he looks good for Clacton. Which would put him (for the first time) in the Mother of all.
Scrutinise the challenger.
We want the Angevin Empire plus the Treaty of Troyes. As a start.
Rejoin? Narp
Think Hostile Takeover. Yarp.
How's the Lab candidate going down? Not to everyone's taste I imagine.
Do you want to know what they said?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1918_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_Ireland
That was an ELE for the Irish Parliamentary Party...
Perhaps, just perhaps, Ukrainians wanted to be out of the Soviet Union? And given the way they're fighting the fascist, imperialist Russians, it seems they still do.
Gladstone's third home rule bill? Later?
The incumbent loses on every single metric.
Your party has given me no reason to vote for it. It has given me several, very personal, reasons to want to bury it 12 feet in the ground.
The speaker would take advice before deciding, and the great and good would unite behind him. The PM, with about 500 MPs behind him in hastily acquired ill fitting suits, won't care less and will back the speaker.
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2022/02/europe/russia-ukraine-crisis-poll-intl/index.html
Memorably described as “that shitty poll” by one of our resident realists.
And, you'll pay for it.
In fact the two most recent national opinion polls do.
Norstat data 24-26 June
Con 23
Lab 39
LibDem 12
Ref 15
Green 6
(Con seats 110)
More in Common data 24-26 June
Con 23
Lab 40
LibDem 11
Ref 14
Green 5
(Con seats 108)
People are only casual to the wild flailing around of the various poll companies because Labour is so far ahead that the outcome is the same in all of them. If we had this level of polling variation in a close election, the media would be full of stories about polling conflict and clueless pollsters.
*L-a-b-o-u-r*
I'm sick and tired of zero scrutiny being applied to their bullshit this campaign. It's a complete dereliction of duty by the press and the curious voter.
They are going to waltz into office without any questioning whatsoever.
If you don't put them on the spot you can't make any complaints whatsoever about what they subsequently do in office. Because you didn't give a shit.
I realised the music I've been listening to has been on auto-repeat the whole time. On one song.
And I had not noticed.
"Leaving", by the Pet Shop Boys, if anyone cares.
(*) Sort of...
Presumably, the former struggle a bit more.
Mine, the L’Auberge du Soleil never changed. Winter was fondue, fondue des tomates, or steak frites. To start it was green salad or Salade Paysane which was fantastic. chicken livers, croutons, mushrooms, red onions, salad leaves and a raspberry vinaigrette.
Summer the same except that the fondues were swapped out for Raclette or Fillet de Perche (fried lake fish) with fries.
The only thing you really have to decide hard about is the wine. But it worked perfectly. Once or twice a week, lunchtime or evening you knew what you were getting and knew it was great.
Yes, a replacement for Putin may be 'worse' for Ukraine and the west than Putin. He may be more competent, more liable to press the big red button, whatever.
That's a concern. Or a replacement might be 'better' for us; one more willing to work with us, to turn Russia back into a civilised nation.
Russia's in a pickle. Any new leader would be insecure at first, and will want to secure his position. He could do this by continuing Putin's agenda and winning in Ukraine (difficult), or he could do this by ending the war however he can.
And my point is this: Putin has painted himself into a corner. He has said a load of shite to the Russian public, and although he can do minor changes, any major ones - like a retreat from Ukraine - would mean the end of his premiership and, by extension, his life.
An successor may well have more latitude to find an accommodation with Ukraine that Putin could not. He would be, to a certain extent, a fresh sheet. Even if he is also a fresh shit as well.
if I was in Government, I'd do this for Business...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQKzSeM6zB0
Instead all we are talking about what is a
womanworking person and which politicians have bet on politics.The first point he makes is a really tough one. Small business, turn-over taxes are crippling, but for large multi-national businesses, its too easy to avoid profit based taxes. And of course large businesses can not only absorb red tape, it also acts as a moat against smaller challengers.
Starmer will use your vote to bolster the size of his giant strap-on and then royally fuck you in the arse, sans vaseline, laughing all the while, at the "mandate" you've given him.
After 5 years your bum is going to be rather sore. It will possibly need surgery.
You're the one who has to live with your decision.
https://x.com/Conservatives/status/1805932619856548153
If a late wheel did happen to come off the Labour campaign, a chunk of voters would probably switch to the LibDems and Reform.
BET365 are offering 14/1 on the Tories in Great Yarmouth, a seat they took by a 40% margin in 2019
DYOR
How is your plan to move abroad going?
They said the market was closed
Not sure if that is due to dodgy betting patterns.
It is a source of persistent disappointment that B&Bs no longer serve them for breakfast.
All day All day.
I couldn't fuck off hard or fast enough given the choice. Which, I'm sure you'd welcome.
I'd probably go for the Canadian paradise. Probably Alberta.