I'm convinced Harris is going to win the election, but deciding how close it's going to be is very difficult.
Unless it is not close at all then we face weeks of legal action, unconstitutional behaviour, protest and far far worse out on the streets sadly.
Thing is, the headline electoral college figures probably won’t be that close, but the popular vote in multiple states will be.
However, unless the close results are all in Republican controlled states and would be decisive to a Harris win, it’s not likely that there will be real barriers to certification.
Interesting to see the Reps are struggling in Nebraska. That’s one of the states with an abortion referendum on the ballot (albeit there is no Dem candidate in the regular election). Would love to see any polling for Missouri on that basis.
Why do you say "the reps are struggling in Nebraska?" I figured it for safe Trump. Dish dirt, please kind sir.
Latest Senate polling in Nebraska has the independent Osborn ahead of the Republican Fischer by 5%.
In Nebraska 2, Harris is ahead by 8-9%
In the rest of Nebraska, Trump still leads by 11%.
In Ukraine, the Russian dead and injured (as claimed by the Ukrainians) will, within days, reach two-thirds of a million.
I've no idea what the exact figure is (no-one will...), but it's telling that Putin signed a decree stopping Russia from tracking its population statistics.
In Ukraine, the Russian dead and injured (as claimed by the Ukrainians) will, within days, reach two-thirds of a million.
There are sadly problems with this: 1) Some chunk of those numbers are Wagner prisoners, foreign mercs, east Ukrainians. 2) Putin doesn’t care how many Russians die and seemingly has few contenders to his power 3) Even with a highly fabourable kill ratio, these numbers imply horrible losses for Ukraine too.
The required “final plan for victory” seems obvious to me. Rather than have tens of thousands of Ukrainians and Russian running into a hail of bullets, Putin needs to be hit where it actually hurts him. Namely Ukrainian needs the means and permissions to systematically destroy Russian oil export terminals, since the sanctions are so fruitless.
I see it’s been estimated that each of Iran’s missiles cost about $100,000 to produce, while to shoot them down cost Israel between $1-3,000,000 a time.
Wikipedia lists it as $100,000 per interception, similar to the missile cost.
"In April, a former financial adviser to the IDF chief of staff said that an Arrow missile typically costs $3.5m (£2.8m) a time, and David’s Sling interceptors $1m (£800,000)."
In Ukraine, the Russian dead and injured (as claimed by the Ukrainians) will, within days, reach two-thirds of a million.
I've no idea what the exact figure is (no-one will...), but it's telling that Putin signed a decree stopping Russia from tracking its population statistics.
In Ukraine, the Russian dead and injured (as claimed by the Ukrainians) will, within days, reach two-thirds of a million.
There are sadly problems with this: 1) Some chunk of those numbers are Wagner prisoners, foreign mercs, east Ukrainians. 2) Putin doesn’t care how many Russians die and seemingly has few contenders to his power 3) Even with a highly fabourable kill ratio, these numbers imply horrible losses for Ukraine too.
The required “final plan for victory” seems obvious to me. Rather than have tens of thousands of Ukrainians and Russian running into a hail of bullets, Putin needs to be hit where it actually hurts him. Namely Ukrainian needs the means and permissions to systematically destroy Russian oil export terminals, since the sanctions are so fruitless.
Are the sanctions 'fruitless' ? IMO, no. They could be stronger, but it also seems obvious (to me at least...) that they're really hurting Russia and its economy. Russia is getting around some of them. but in ways that increase their costs considerably.
But these sanctions are not meant to have an instantaneous effect; and they are meant to hurt Russia's ability to wage war. And in that, I think they've been far better than not having them. Are they perfect? No. Does that mean that they should be abandoned? No. Should they be tightened? Yes.
I see Kemi-kazi keeps gaffeing, but is the Tory selectorate a bit MAGA and not too bothered by truth?
Is there some value developing here?
There's value if you can see a way she makes the final two, but she'll only do that if a significant number of Stride and Tugendhat/Cleverly supporting MPs break for her in the next 2 rounds or she takes MPs off Jenrick. Neither seems likely.
In Ukraine, the Russian dead and injured (as claimed by the Ukrainians) will, within days, reach two-thirds of a million.
I've no idea what the exact figure is (no-one will...), but it's telling that Putin signed a decree stopping Russia from tracking its population statistics.
Presumably because by 2029, "Russia" will include all of Ukraine.
Plus Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland...
In his mind.
The combination of casualties and the much larger number of people who have fled has already had a huge impact on Russian demographics. Some experts are talking about a tipping point where large areas of Russia face terminal depopulation. Several Siberian cities, for example, have already lost over a third of their population since 1991. There comes a point where an isolated Siberian city can no longer provide sufficient services to allow people to live there, and this is already happening in smaller places. If I was Putin I would also want to hide the scale of the decay that has happened on his watch. Even if Russia could eke out some kind of nominal, and probably rather temporary, victory against Ukraine, which is still far off, the birth rate would have to increase on a scale never seen ever, anywhere, in order to reverse the trend.
Although Putin´s increasingly repressive state is trying to legislate larger families by carrot- payments to mothers- and stick - banning abortions etc. it is highly unlikely to work. In any event the last person who tried that was Nicolae Ceausescu.
Putin has now increased official defence expenditure to 40% of total government spending, but even that number is "only" $145 billion which is still puny compared to the over $1.3 trillion of NATO member states (and these states are now also increasing their own defence spending). Russia has now bet the farm on a quick victory. It is a bet that, increasingly, Putin looks likely to lose. The consequences could well include the collapse of Russia in its current form.
Comments
In Nebraska 2, Harris is ahead by 8-9%
In the rest of Nebraska, Trump still leads by 11%.
https://www.newsweek.com/russia-suspends-population-census-till-2029-1962581
Is there some value developing here?
1) Some chunk of those numbers are Wagner prisoners, foreign mercs, east Ukrainians.
2) Putin doesn’t care how many Russians die and seemingly has few contenders to his power
3) Even with a highly fabourable kill ratio, these numbers imply horrible losses for Ukraine too.
The required “final plan for victory” seems obvious to me. Rather than have tens of thousands of Ukrainians and Russian running into a hail of bullets, Putin needs to be hit where it actually hurts him. Namely Ukrainian needs the means and permissions to systematically destroy Russian oil export terminals, since the sanctions are so fruitless.
"In April, a former financial adviser to the IDF chief of staff said that an Arrow missile typically costs $3.5m (£2.8m) a time, and David’s Sling interceptors $1m (£800,000)."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/oct/01/stopping-iran-attack-would-have-forced-israel-to-use-sophisticated-and-expensive-defences#:~:text=In April, a former financial,$1m (£800,000).
NEW THREAD
Plus Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland...
In his mind.
But these sanctions are not meant to have an instantaneous effect; and they are meant to hurt Russia's ability to wage war. And in that, I think they've been far better than not having them. Are they perfect? No. Does that mean that they should be abandoned? No. Should they be tightened? Yes.
Neither seems likely.
Although Putin´s increasingly repressive state is trying to legislate larger families by carrot- payments to mothers- and stick - banning abortions etc. it is highly unlikely to work. In any event the last person who tried that was Nicolae Ceausescu.
Putin has now increased official defence expenditure to 40% of total government spending, but even that number is "only" $145 billion which is still puny compared to the over $1.3 trillion of NATO member states (and these states are now also increasing their own defence spending). Russia has now bet the farm on a quick victory. It is a bet that, increasingly, Putin looks likely to lose. The consequences could well include the collapse of Russia in its current form.