Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer was a better lawyer than Blair, a KC no less but is a much less astute politician.
Blair wasn't even the best lawyer in his family, his father and wife were but when he won a seat in Parliament in 1983 and Cherie didn't it was for a reason, he was a very capable politician. Cherie sensibly stuck to law (as arguably Hillary should have and left Bill to do the politics)
Come on, did anyone think Labour would be THIS bad after just 3 months?
Literally handing over chunks of British territory to China in a deal where WE pay? And thereby angering the USA?
As far as I can see the only British politician applauding this (outside starmer & co) is… Jeremy Corbyn
"Chunks of British Territory" - the entire BIOT, including Diego Garcia, is roughly the size of the London Borough of Redbridge.
Perhaps we should just hand over Redbridge.....
It's 60,000 sq km of Indian Ocean, twit
So the water area is slightly larger than Croatia, okay.
Just thought I'd try to stop the flow as you seem to be having such an enjoyable evening and so many more to come.
Assuming Starmer goes for an election on Thursday May 3rd 2029 by which time presuambly he'll be as popular as the Black Death that gives you 1,673 more days of Labour Government.
Enjoy.....
Actually Leon is wrong. But not in a way that helps your argument. It is not 60,000 square Km, it is 640,000 square Km. So to use your analogy, not an area slightly larger than Croatia but an area around 2.5 times the entire British Isles.
A place consisting a few bits of coral in the ocean and of which very few had heard of until this lunchtime.
Suddenly now a new front in the culture wars as a ton of twitter-based and GB News radical right decide it is the end of Olde England as we know it.
Pathetic.
It is in a pivotal strategic position in the Indian Ocean, we have a vital base there (as well as environmental protection of a huge oceanic reserve). We have ceded all this and endangered the US/UK base - for literally nothing, or worse, we are paying. Recall we are now likely engaged in a 100 year Cold War with China - and this makes that war notably harder
And the reason for doing this is the Chagossians? - who, it turns out, are deeply unhappy about this and weren't even consulted. How bad does it have to be before you admit, yeah, this is shit
1) This is a bit shit
but
2) As I understand it we now have a 100 year lease on DG which we can renew unilaterally at the end of the current term. Which puts DG on a stronger legal footing than it was before I suspect.
The Chinese will now plunder the oceanic reserve and the legal footing of the base is now much shakier (soveriegnty is all) and of course the Mauritian govt (chief trading partner by far: China) can now allow the Chinese to develop fishing bases and marinas and observation decks and the rest until DG itself is so strangled it is useless. This is presumably why the USA was pleading with Starmer not to do this act of self-harm (as per: The Times)
AND we are paying for this. AND it does not benefit the Chagossians
A place consisting a few bits of coral in the ocean and of which very few had heard of until this lunchtime.
Suddenly now a new front in the culture wars as a ton of twitter-based and GB News radical right decide it is the end of Olde England as we know it.
Pathetic.
Are you sure it is wise to advertise your ignorance in this way? The BIOT and the Chagos MPA were discussed on here at some length a few years ago when we were having some random discussion about environmental protection. Some of us do like to keep abreast of such things.
In 2019 when UN voted on court of justice resolution on the chagos coral atoll - six voted against : Australia, Hungary, Israel, Maldives, United Kingdom, United States.
In 2019 when UN voted on court of justice resolution on the chagos coral atoll - six voted against : Australia, Hungary, Israel, Maldives, United Kingdom, United States.
Interesting mix.
Maybe patriots with lots of money should choose the Maldives for their winter breaks
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
If we take Truss out of the equation as a weird outlier, I would say Starmer is so far, and by a distance, the worst PM we have had in living memory - even worse than Brown or TMay (or indeed Boris, for the Boris-haters)
Why? Because nearly all the bad shit he's done to date has been unforced. Didn't need to do Winter Fuel, didn't need to take £100k in freebies, didn't need to give away the Indian Ocean to China. Yet he's done it
In 2019 when UN voted on court of justice resolution on the chagos coral atoll - six voted against : Australia, Hungary, Israel, Maldives, United Kingdom, United States.
Interesting mix.
Maybe patriots with lots of money should choose the Maldives for their winter breaks
Come on, did anyone think Labour would be THIS bad after just 3 months?
Literally handing over chunks of British territory to China in a deal where WE pay? And thereby angering the USA?
As far as I can see the only British politician applauding this (outside starmer & co) is… Jeremy Corbyn
"Chunks of British Territory" - the entire BIOT, including Diego Garcia, is roughly the size of the London Borough of Redbridge.
Perhaps we should just hand over Redbridge.....
It's 60,000 sq km of Indian Ocean, twit
So the water area is slightly larger than Croatia, okay.
Just thought I'd try to stop the flow as you seem to be having such an enjoyable evening and so many more to come.
Assuming Starmer goes for an election on Thursday May 3rd 2029 by which time presuambly he'll be as popular as the Black Death that gives you 1,673 more days of Labour Government.
Enjoy.....
Actually Leon is wrong. But not in a way that helps your argument. It is not 60,000 square Km, it is 640,000 square Km. So to use your analogy, not an area slightly larger than Croatia but an area around 2.5 times the entire British Isles.
But the actual territorial waters are 54,000 sq, km.
Doesn't matter. The effective control we have surrendered was over the MPA which is, as I said, 640,000 square Km. And frankly, absent the poor old Chagossians who appear to have been ignored entirely by all sides in this, the MPA is the only thing that really matters. If the claims about Mauritian/Chinese relations are true then this is a very bad day for the natural world.
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
Or he’s playing a longer game, which cognitively challenged minnows like our Leon, who has no longer or wider or deeper view beyond the last thing he saw on Twitter, couldn’t hope to fathom out.
Washington and Beijing are leaving the European Union lagging behind, French President Emmanuel Macron said in pessimistic remarks.
“The EU could die, we are on a verge of a very important moment,” he said.
Die in what sense? The end of the Euro? Can't see that. The end of the Project? Surely, the Lizard People won't let that happen will they?
The end of freedom of movement? The end of the bureaucratic-technocratic assault on democracy? The end of the monstrous levels of graft and corruption? What death are you talking, Macron?
Perhaps Starmer should offer him a tissue - and a fast-tracked membership of the Commonwealth?
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
Or he’s playing a longer game, which cognitively challenged minnows like our Leon couldn’t hope to fathom out.
In 2019 when UN voted on court of justice resolution on the chagos coral atoll - six voted against : Australia, Hungary, Israel, Maldives, United Kingdom, United States.
Interesting mix.
Maybe patriots with lots of money should choose the Maldives for their winter breaks
My daughter and her husband did in 1998 ( married November 1998)
Washington and Beijing are leaving the European Union lagging behind, French President Emmanuel Macron said in pessimistic remarks.
“The EU could die, we are on a verge of a very important moment,” he said.
Die in what sense? The end of the Euro? Can't see that. The end of the Project? Surely, the Lizard People won't let that happen will they?
The end of freedom of movement? The end of the bureaucratic-technocratic assault on democracy? The end of the monstrous levels of graft and corruption? What death are you talking, Macron?
Perhaps Starmer should offer him a tissue - and a fast-tracked membership of the Commonwealth?
A place consisting a few bits of coral in the ocean and of which very few had heard of until this lunchtime.
Suddenly now a new front in the culture wars as a ton of twitter-based and GB News radical right decide it is the end of Olde England as we know it.
Pathetic.
Are you sure it is wise to advertise your ignorance in this way? The BIOT and the Chagos MPA were discussed on here at some length a few years ago when we were having some random discussion about environmental protection. Some of us do like to keep abreast of such things.
In terms of awkward, seemingly minor foreign policy issues, it's certainly been around for a while. Not as problematic as the Falklands; roughly the same as Gibraltar?
The assumption was that it would not become a big issue simply because the US value it so much and realpolitik would win out. Wrong!
In 2019 when UN voted on court of justice resolution on the chagos coral atoll - six voted against : Australia, Hungary, Israel, Maldives, United Kingdom, United States.
Interesting mix.
Maybe patriots with lots of money should choose the Maldives for their winter breaks
The Chagos is basically a southerly extension of the Maldives!
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
Or he’s playing a longer game, which cognitively challenged minnows like our Leon couldn’t hope to fathom out.
One can hope.
Go on then, what is it?
Perhaps it is more that he is a lawyer's lawyer and the international court ruled and he accepts the ruling?
Washington and Beijing are leaving the European Union lagging behind, French President Emmanuel Macron said in pessimistic remarks.
“The EU could die, we are on a verge of a very important moment,” he said.
Die in what sense? The end of the Euro? Can't see that. The end of the Project? Surely, the Lizard People won't let that happen will they?
The end of freedom of movement? The end of the bureaucratic-technocratic assault on democracy? The end of the monstrous levels of graft and corruption? What death are you talking, Macron?
Perhaps Starmer should offer him a tissue - and a fast-tracked membership of the Commonwealth?
I’m pretty sure the answer will be More Europe.
Macron's appointment of Thierry Breton was one of the worst Commissioners they've had.
Children can't choose their names, so the least we can do is pick sensible ones. Giving her the middle name Thatcher because she's your political hero is just ridiculous.
I agree. It reflects badly on "Bobby J". Not a partisan point, this, I'd feel the same about, say, Andy Burnham calling his daughter Atlee. Well not quite the same, that sounds a bit better, in fact it sounds quite good, but the principle is the same. Parents, don't do it. It's a touch egotistical and not appropriate.
I am the last one to approve of American trends, but there is a fairly big thing of them calling girls by stupid surnames - Tailor for example, that has clearly made some inroads here, along with grey squirrels and childhood obesity. 'Thatcher' fits into that category.
It’s marginally better than Boris, as a girl’s name.
Boris opens the first editions of his memoir in a state of great excitement, published next week just as the final 2 in the Tory leadership election are announced
Washington and Beijing are leaving the European Union lagging behind, French President Emmanuel Macron said in pessimistic remarks.
“The EU could die, we are on a verge of a very important moment,” he said.
Die in what sense? The end of the Euro? Can't see that. The end of the Project? Surely, the Lizard People won't let that happen will they?
The end of freedom of movement? The end of the bureaucratic-technocratic assault on democracy? The end of the monstrous levels of graft and corruption? What death are you talking, Macron?
Perhaps Starmer should offer him a tissue - and a fast-tracked membership of the Commonwealth?
We’d have to leave. I don’t wish to be a member of any club that would admit the French.
Boris opens the first editions of his memoir in a state of great excitement, published next week just as the final 2 in the Tory leadership election are announced
Washington and Beijing are leaving the European Union lagging behind, French President Emmanuel Macron said in pessimistic remarks.
“The EU could die, we are on a verge of a very important moment,” he said.
Die in what sense? The end of the Euro? Can't see that. The end of the Project? Surely, the Lizard People won't let that happen will they?
The end of freedom of movement? The end of the bureaucratic-technocratic assault on democracy? The end of the monstrous levels of graft and corruption? What death are you talking, Macron?
Perhaps Starmer should offer him a tissue - and a fast-tracked membership of the Commonwealth?
We’d have to leave. I don’t wish to be a member of any club that would admit the French.
Don't be so hasty. What if club members...had to adopt the £?
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
In 2019 when UN voted on court of justice resolution on the chagos coral atoll - six voted against : Australia, Hungary, Israel, Maldives, United Kingdom, United States.
Interesting mix.
Maybe patriots with lots of money should choose the Maldives for their winter breaks
The Chagos is basically a southerly extension of the Maldives!
Green 57.8% (+22.7) Lab 22.4% (-18.2) Con 13.7% (-4.8) LD 6.1% (+0.3)
They are in free-fall
Lancaster has been a hot house of Greens for a decade or more. Especially near the uni as this seat is I think.
Shows the potential nightmare scenario for Labour if its unpopularity freefall continues.
Losing students, academics and leftwing public sector workers and those on welfare to the Greens, losing the white working class to Reform and middle class private sector workers and pensioners to the LDs and Tories
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
Nowhere in Western Europe are the very hard right in power alone though, where they are in power as in Italy and Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands and maybe Austria it is only in coalition with the centre right.
Green 57.8% (+22.7) Lab 22.4% (-18.2) Con 13.7% (-4.8) LD 6.1% (+0.3)
They are in free-fall
Lancaster has been a hot house of Greens for a decade or more. Especially near the uni as this seat is I think.
Shows the potential nightmare scenario for Labour if its unpopularity freefall continues.
Losing students, academics and leftwing public sector workers and those on welfare to the Greens, losing the white working class to Reform and middle class private sector workers and pensioners to the Tories and LDs
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
Nowhere in Western Europe are the very hard right in power alone though, where they are in power as in Italy and Sweden and the Netherlands and maybe Austria it is only in coalition with the centre right.
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
Nowhere in Western Europe are the very hard right in power alone though, where they are in power as in Italy and Sweden and the Netherlands and maybe Austria it is only in coalition with the centre right.
Fuck the Tories. Fuck them to Hell
You can't remove Labour from power without us though
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
It appears Starmer, Reeves and Milliband are to announce a 25 billion pound carbon capture and storage investment in a press conference
Over 25 years apparently
Dianne Abbott says repaying the freebies is an admission they were wrong
And to top it all Baroness Harman has said Starmer should call a cobra meeting to discuss the freebies
It is a comedy show but the people are not laughing
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
Nowhere in Western Europe are the very hard right in power alone though, where they are in power as in Italy and Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands and maybe Austria it is only in coalition with the centre right.
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
Nowhere in Western Europe are the very hard right in power alone though, where they are in power as in Italy and Sweden and the Netherlands and maybe Austria it is only in coalition with the centre right.
Fuck the Tories. Fuck them to Hell
You can't remove Labour from power without us though
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
It appears Starmer, Reeves and Milliband are to announce a 25 billion pound carbon capture and storage investment in a press conference
Over 25 years apparently
Dianne Abbott says repaying the freebies is an admission they were wrong
And to top it all Baroness Harman has said Starmer should call a cobra meeting to discuss the freebies
It is a comedy show but the people are not laughing
Carbon capture and storage is such a dead-end technology. It's always going to be more expensive than simply burning the fossil fuels and not capturing the carbon dioxide. At least with renewables and storage the technology can develop so that it becomes cheaper than fossil fuels, which it has done so already to a certain extent.
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
Nowhere in Western Europe are the very hard right in power alone though, where they are in power as in Italy and Sweden and the Netherlands and maybe Austria it is only in coalition with the centre right.
Fuck the Tories. Fuck them to Hell
You can't remove Labour from power without us though
I hope your party dies
With Badenoch the Tories may have a chance of resurrection.
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
It appears Starmer, Reeves and Milliband are to announce a 25 billion pound carbon capture and storage investment in a press conference
Over 25 years apparently
Dianne Abbott says repaying the freebies is an admission they were wrong
And to top it all Baroness Harman has said Starmer should call a cobra meeting to discuss the freebies
It is a comedy show but the people are not laughing
CCS is in serious trouble because the main leaders in it are the medium sized oil companies. Since Milliband is trying to drive them out of the UK the chances of them actually sticking with CCS long term look thin.
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
Nowhere in Western Europe are the very hard right in power alone though, where they are in power as in Italy and Sweden and the Netherlands and maybe Austria it is only in coalition with the centre right.
Fuck the Tories. Fuck them to Hell
You can't remove Labour from power without us though
I hope your party dies
It won't, for starters the middle class non Labour vote won't vote Reform
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
Nowhere in Western Europe are the very hard right in power alone though, where they are in power as in Italy and Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands and maybe Austria it is only in coalition with the centre right.
Canada does and the Tory and Reform split there kept the Liberals in power for over a decade until finally the Tories and Reform merged to form the Conservative party of Canada that won in 2006
Tony Blair to Jonathan Powell and Alastair Campbell after the handover of Hong Kong:
"We shouldn't lose any more territory."
"After Hong Kong, we mustn't lose any more territory. Britain's not big enough."
FFS. Quarter of a century has passed.
He’s the yardstick for modern Labour PMs.
Yep, no way would Blair have done this
Blair had a sense of the British national interest, and was a genuine patriot, I think. Iraq was a monumental blunder but he was and is also geopolitically intelligent. He would have dismissed this idea - PAYING to cede British sovereign territory - as laughably mad. I would take him back in a second, he's clever and cunning
Starmer is a vain, poseur lawyer with a middling brain and deep moral and social insecurities, he is a disaster and the disaster will get worse
Starmer is showing himself up to be an incredibly poor PM, in my opinion. A shame, because I thought he had tremendous promise. We could’ve done with a steady, strong leader at the wheel after the last 8 or so years of crisis and chaos. It’s still early days, but the signs really aren’t good.
I think it was @david_herdson who made an excellent post earlier today about how poorly Starmer and Labour had handled the politics of the removal of the Winter Fuel Allowance.
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
I suspect we might follow mainland Europe and veer hard right and go reform
Nowhere in Western Europe are the very hard right in power alone though, where they are in power as in Italy and Sweden and the Netherlands and maybe Austria it is only in coalition with the centre right.
Fuck the Tories. Fuck them to Hell
You can't remove Labour from power without us though
I hope your party dies
With Badenoch the Tories may have a chance of resurrection.
Ye Gods, the ridiculous hyperbole on here tonight.
Sorry you are suffering as Starmer falls to just 18% approving and below Sunak's lowest 19%
With time slipping rapidly away, Sir Keir has just five years before he has to face the electorate.
Boris with his 80 seat majority didn't last his full term
I didn’t think Starmer would be in this position just weeks after his election, and while he may last 5 years, I am not sure I would bet on it right now
Ye Gods, the ridiculous hyperbole on here tonight.
Sorry you are suffering as Starmer falls to just 18% approving and below Sunak's lowest 19%
With time slipping rapidly away, Sir Keir has just five years before he has to face the electorate.
Yup. Even if we look at the locals, 2025 is Tory high point vaccine bounce results, plus a few new mayoralties Starmer won’t be too fussed over. He doesn’t have serious elections to worry about until 2026.
Could see them completely squeezed out by Reform/Lib Dems, the first (and possibly last) major hurdle for the next leader.
That depends on the new leader and goodness knows who that will be
If Labour do collapse - and this budget is going to have be quite something - it could turbocharge Reform and the Lib Dems. Ideally the Conservatives would have a few years to pick themselves up, get rid of a weird alt-right leader and become electable again.
They might not have that kind of time. Two fronts, and soon.
Could see them completely squeezed out by Reform/Lib Dems, the first (and possibly last) major hurdle for the next leader.
That depends on the new leader and goodness knows who that will be
If Labour do collapse - and this budget is going to have be quite something - it could turbocharge Reform and the Lib Dems. Ideally the Conservatives would have a few years to pick themselves up, get rid of a weird alt-right leader and become electable again.
They might not have that kind of time. Two fronts, and soon.
I think the political landscape is just too volatile to be certain of anything, but it seems obvious that Starmer has failed in expectations and you may be right the votes go to Reform and Lib Dems and even a recovery of the SNP in Scotland, but I think it is premature to dismiss the conservatives, we just do not know anything about them at present
Ye Gods, the ridiculous hyperbole on here tonight.
Sorry you are suffering as Starmer falls to just 18% approving and below Sunak's lowest 19%
With time slipping rapidly away, Sir Keir has just five years before he has to face the electorate.
Yup. Even if we look at the locals, 2025 is Tory high point vaccine bounce results, plus a few new mayoralties Starmer won’t be too fussed over. He doesn’t have serious elections to worry about until 2026.
There are 50 locals this month which should give an idea of the political map
Could see them completely squeezed out by Reform/Lib Dems, the first (and possibly last) major hurdle for the next leader.
That depends on the new leader and goodness knows who that will be
If Labour do collapse - and this budget is going to have be quite something - it could turbocharge Reform and the Lib Dems. Ideally the Conservatives would have a few years to pick themselves up, get rid of a weird alt-right leader and become electable again.
They might not have that kind of time. Two fronts, and soon.
Labour could lose on all fronts and face the kind of wipe out that the Tories avoided this time.
Could see them completely squeezed out by Reform/Lib Dems, the first (and possibly last) major hurdle for the next leader.
That depends on the new leader and goodness knows who that will be
If Labour do collapse - and this budget is going to have be quite something - it could turbocharge Reform and the Lib Dems. Ideally the Conservatives would have a few years to pick themselves up, get rid of a weird alt-right leader and become electable again.
They might not have that kind of time. Two fronts, and soon.
Labour could lose on all fronts and face the kind of wipe out that the Tories avoided this time.
Indeed, the Tories still have pensioners. If Labour lost the private sector middle class to the LDs, the public sector middle class, students and those on welfare to the Greens and the Muslim vote to Corbyn's Independents and the white working class to Reform they wouldn't have any voters left
Some good news from the USA for those of us hoping for a Harris win .
The east coast and Gulf dockworkers strike is over . An agreement has been reached with a wage increase and other issues to be negotiated over the next few months .
This will come as a huge relief to the Dems who could have ended up in a no win situation and with severe economic impacts if it had continued .
For the first time in ages there's a film I'm looking forward to seeing.
Joker: Folie à Deux.
I wouldn't look at the reviews, then... ☹️
I heard the start of Mark Kermode's review where he said it was a weird film but in a good way. Deliberately didn't watch the rest of it until I've seen it myself.
Tonight’s Israeli Airstrikes on the Southern Suburbs of Beirut are said to have Targeted a Deep-Underground Bunker utilized by Hezbollah, hiding inside of which Israeli Officials believe was the New Secretary-General of Hezbollah, Hashem Safieddine as well as his Family and several other Senior Hezbollah Officials.
That would be the new Hezbollah leader who replaced the previous new Hezbollah leader who was eliminated after he replaced the previous leader who was eliminated.
The comparison with Israel, who defies international law and scorns international opinion; and Britain, who meekly hands over the Chagos under a pretty flimsy claim from Mauritius is rather telling.
No doubt the FO is celebrating for having removed a diplomatic irritant while securing what looks to be indefinite lease on Diego Garcia, but certainly China will be quietly celebrating.
Seems like the rot started when Britain lost the UN vote to refer it to the ICJ, and then lost its own seat on the ICJ as part of the generalised Brexit fall-out. British clout was formerly, albeit grudgingly perhaps, supported by our European partners.
Agree with the post from @LostPassword above that whatever happens in the budget, Starmer just isn’t very good at retail politics.
So far I’d say he’s on a par with Sunak, who was similarly tin-eared.
Having said that, he didn’t exactly get off to a great start as LoTo. His first shadow cabinet is now lost in the mists of time. So perhaps he can grow into the PM job.
1D chess is a new variant for me. I'm guessing that all the pieces are stacked in a pile on a single square, perhaps with the white king on top, and the black king on the bottom. But that's just guessing.
Comments
Blair wasn't even the best lawyer in his family, his father and wife were but when he won a seat in Parliament in 1983 and Cherie didn't it was for a reason, he was a very capable politician. Cherie sensibly stuck to law (as arguably Hillary should have and left Bill to do the politics)
AND we are paying for this. AND it does not benefit the Chagossians
That trumps any national interests.
Interesting mix.
Why? Because nearly all the bad shit he's done to date has been unforced. Didn't need to do Winter Fuel, didn't need to take £100k in freebies, didn't need to give away the Indian Ocean to China. Yet he's done it
Or maybe their guy raised his hand by mistake?
One can hope.
The end of freedom of movement? The end of the bureaucratic-technocratic assault on democracy? The end of the monstrous levels of graft and corruption? What death are you talking, Macron?
Perhaps Starmer should offer him a tissue - and a fast-tracked membership of the Commonwealth?
The assumption was that it would not become a big issue simply because the US value it so much and realpolitik would win out. Wrong!
See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chagos–Laccadive_Ridge
https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1841966690529116483?t=0LPWjIJgsZ9KbZMKdsW75A&s=19
Green 57.8% (+22.7)
Lab 22.4% (-18.2)
Con 13.7% (-4.8)
LD 6.1% (+0.3)
Green gain from Lab
https://x.com/LeeDavidEvansUK/status/1841844949148401999
Not a surprise. But he puts the argument so well.
https://x.com/CoryBooker/status/1841953766956007789
I've been tempted to argue that we should wait at least until the budget, to see whether Starmer and Reeves get the problems Britain faces and have an approach that might help, but David's post crystallised my thinking and reminded me of something I've said before. In a democracy it's not enough to be right, you also have to be convincing, and we've seen enough now to safely conclude that Starmer and Labour are not convincing. They do not have the political leadership ability to tell a story that will convince people why certain actions are necessary, and will pay off in the future.
So it doesn't matter what is in the budget, because we can be confident that Labour will bungle the messaging of it. That's it. They're done.
The question then is: what next?
The Tory defeat at the election was so deep, so profound - and against such a weak opposition - that it feels unlikely they will simply bounce back into government (though of course they are the official opposition, so ought to benefit most from the government's failures). That leaves the Lib Dems and Reform fighting to give voice to the public's frustration.
https://www.itv.com/news/2024-09-30/baby-reindeer-judge-rules-series-not-a-true-story-and-approves-170m-lawsuit
Losing students, academics and leftwing public sector workers and those on welfare to the Greens, losing the white working class to Reform and middle class private sector workers and pensioners to the LDs and Tories
Unless they deliver then this will come to pass.
Five more years though.
Over 25 years apparently
Dianne Abbott says repaying the freebies is an admission they were wrong
And to top it all Baroness Harman has said Starmer should call a cobra meeting to discuss the freebies
It is a comedy show but the people are not laughing
RefUK 462
Lab 334
Con 254
Ind 84
LD 33
Green 25
RefUK gain from Lab
That will be interesting
RefUK 38.76%
Lab 28.02%
Con 21.31%
Ind 7.05%
LD 2.77%
Green 2.10%
Changes (using top vote)
RefUK +29.35%
Lab -23.04%
Con -18.21%
Swing Lab to RefUK 26.19%
https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1841976992549237087?t=MVLSO7Rp4hSE_wbs6AIyHA&s=19
I didn’t think Starmer would be in this position just weeks after his election, and while he may last 5 years, I am not sure I would bet on it right now
'Lochee (Dundee) Council By-Election Result [1st Prefs]:
🎗️ SNP: 37.3% (-5.9)
🌹 LAB: 35.6% (-0.2)
🌳 CON: 6.8% (-1.6)
🔷 ALBA: 5.5% (+2.4)
🌍 GRN: 5.5% (+1.3)
🔶 LDM: 4.8% (+1.7)
⚙️ WPB: 4.4% (New)
No SFP (-2.2) as previous.
SNP Elected Stage 7 - GAIN from Labour*
Changes w/ 2022.'
https://xcancel.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1841979473048330505#m
Joker: Folie à Deux.
Could see them completely squeezed out by Reform/Lib Dems, the first (and possibly last) major hurdle for the next leader.
So what is the point? Apart from “owning the Tories”?
I imagine you are somewhat disappointed but can’t admit it
They might not have that kind of time. Two fronts, and soon.
https://x.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1841979473048330505
The east coast and Gulf dockworkers strike is over . An agreement has been reached with a wage increase and other issues to be negotiated over the next few months .
This will come as a huge relief to the Dems who could have ended up in a no win situation and with severe economic impacts if it had continued .
https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1841965510088434003
That would be the new Hezbollah leader who replaced the previous new Hezbollah leader who was eliminated after he replaced the previous leader who was eliminated.
No doubt the FO is celebrating for having removed a diplomatic irritant while securing what looks to be indefinite lease on Diego Garcia, but certainly China will be quietly celebrating.
Seems like the rot started when Britain lost the UN vote to refer it to the ICJ, and then lost its own seat on the ICJ as part of the generalised Brexit fall-out.
British clout was formerly, albeit grudgingly perhaps, supported by our European partners.
So far I’d say he’s on a par with Sunak, who was similarly tin-eared.
Having said that, he didn’t exactly get off to a great start as LoTo. His first shadow cabinet is now lost in the mists of time. So perhaps he can grow into the PM job.
Would someone fill us in on the rules, please.