If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Exactly. Why exactly would we get heavily involved? It is a scandal that we're as heavily involved as we are. David Lammy lobbing them £600 million without any benefit to even our arms industry was surely the nadir.
"The problem, was largely politicians at various levels pleading that their area be left out of restrictions" 🤔 Christ, fancy that.. a few politicians not being keen on draconian, top down state diktats..not enough in my opinion..and not loud enough either..🤨
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Exactly. Why exactly would we get heavily involved? It is a scandal that we're as heavily involved as we are. David Lammy lobbing them £600 million without any benefit to even our arms industry was surely the nadir.
We are doing it because it is right to fight fascism. And if we do not fight it in Ukraine, we will be fighting it elsewhere, when Russia and its allies are stronger.
It is a simple equation: spend less blood and treasure now, or a great deal more blood and treasure later.
I would prefer to spend nothing now, and spend nothing later - *except* exploit our own energy sources so we're no longer at the whims of the oil and gas market, bolster our own defences including missile defences and our naval fleet, and reinstate a truly independent nuclear programme so we could *actually* respond to the threat of a nuclear strike. Those things would strengthen us vs. Russia or anyone else.
That's the we-are-an-island fallacy.
Well, we obviously are an island, but we are not in terms of resources - and neither can we be. Even if we do without all the plastic tat coming from China, we still need those lovely chips from America and Taiwan, along with food and a million and one other things. If we allow fascism to spread, there will come a time when those resources we need are no longer available.
We cannot pull the drawbridge up against the world. And that means we will eventually need to intervene to protect our interests. And it is better to do that now than later.
Then there's the moral issue: one you routinely ignore.
We can do the drawbridge stuff if we accept a basic diet, only a quasi industrial lifestyle and want only 20 million people on these islands.
Otherwise, we need global interconnectivity and trade to subsist at our current population and sophistication levels.
If we go back to North Korea levels of lifestyle... perhaps. But not otherwise. As another example: medicines/drugs.
The flaw with Cleverley as the saviour in a couple of years time is the spectacular lack of political nous he demonstrated in managing to lose from the position he found himself in. If the next Tory leader does turn out to be a dud, they may be better off looking at someone entirely new.
I wasn't impressed by Cleverley as a minister - but the reason for his support is that his flaws are less obvious than either Badenoch or Jenrick. I agree with you in theory, but the problem the Tories have in practice is - who is that entirely new superstar?
Rory Stewart
Yes, good suggestion except that he doesn't seem interested in resuming a parliamentary career. But he illustrates two problems the Conservative party currently has:
Politically he is much closer to the LDs than the Conservatives, and it is not his views that have changed much.
If he (or someone like him) did manage to be elected leader somehow, there would be a mass exodus to Reform. Maybe that would be best for the Conservatives and the country in the long run, but it would probably hole the party below the waterline before it had a chance to rebuild.
I get the impression that Rory Stewart quite likes being a post politics pontificator. And the podcast is (I assume) paid OK in some way, and if the network is in it's not-yet-profitable phase, Gary Lineker can afford it.
I can't see any reason for him to go back to a shark infested paddling pool.
The flaw with Cleverley as the saviour in a couple of years time is the spectacular lack of political nous he demonstrated in managing to lose from the position he found himself in. If the next Tory leader does turn out to be a dud, they may be better off looking at someone entirely new.
I wasn't impressed by Cleverley as a minister - but the reason for his support is that his flaws are less obvious than either Badenoch or Jenrick. I agree with you in theory, but the problem the Tories have in practice is - who is that entirely new superstar?
Rory Stewart
Yes, good suggestion except that he doesn't seem interested in resuming a parliamentary career. But he illustrates two problems the Conservative party currently has:
Politically he is much closer to the LDs than the Conservatives, and it is not his views that have changed much.
If he (or someone like him) did manage to be elected leader somehow, there would be a mass exodus to Reform. Maybe that would be best for the Conservatives and the country in the long run, but it would probably hole the party below the waterline before it had a chance to rebuild.
I get the impression that Rory Stewart quite likes being a post politics pontificator. And the podcast is (I assume) paid OK in some way, and if the network is in it's not-yet-profitable phase, Gary Lineker can afford it.
I can't see any reason for him to go back to a shark infested paddling pool.
I would imagine the live spin-off shows pay very well and have minimal costs really.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Exactly. Why exactly would we get heavily involved? It is a scandal that we're as heavily involved as we are. David Lammy lobbing them £600 million without any benefit to even our arms industry was surely the nadir.
We are doing it because it is right to fight fascism. And if we do not fight it in Ukraine, we will be fighting it elsewhere, when Russia and its allies are stronger.
It is a simple equation: spend less blood and treasure now, or a great deal more blood and treasure later.
I would prefer to spend nothing now, and spend nothing later - *except* exploit our own energy sources so we're no longer at the whims of the oil and gas market, bolster our own defences including missile defences and our naval fleet, and reinstate a truly independent nuclear programme so we could *actually* respond to the threat of a nuclear strike. Those things would strengthen us vs. Russia or anyone else.
That's the we-are-an-island fallacy.
Well, we obviously are an island, but we are not in terms of resources - and neither can we be. Even if we do without all the plastic tat coming from China, we still need those lovely chips from America and Taiwan, along with food and a million and one other things. If we allow fascism to spread, there will come a time when those resources we need are no longer available.
We cannot pull the drawbridge up against the world. And that means we will eventually need to intervene to protect our interests. And it is better to do that now than later.
Then there's the moral issue: one you routinely ignore.
We can do the drawbridge stuff if we accept a basic diet, only a quasi industrial lifestyle and want only 20 million people on these islands.
Otherwise, we need global interconnectivity and trade to subsist at our current population and sophistication levels.
If we go back to North Korea levels of lifestyle... perhaps. But not otherwise. As another example: medicines/drugs.
Mind, a Tory ag minister wanted to promote patriotic British swedes as an autarkic diet - and I'm talking this decade, not the 1940s and Woolton Pie.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
That doesn't work. It's pay now or pay many times more later.
You don't save yourself from a bear by giving it half a pound of sausages.
Every time something happened which we were told would dent Trump's popularity, like 6th January, I thought to myself this isn't going to make much difference to his level of support: because people aren't voting for him for positive reasons. It's almost entirely a protest vote. The only way to reduce his support is by tackling the root causes of the problems in the US.
They dont care that Trumps an a.sehole. They just hate the liberal elites and want to hurt them.
I believe you are correct and they are mainly unhappy people that are unable to do anything about making themselves content and will always play the blame game. They need to look at themselves and see where they can make improvements to their personality and improve their mental health which definitely needs rebalancing.
You are talking about at least 45% of the us population. This isnt some tiny minority.
We know in the last Trump election 52% of the voters eligible to vote did so. 48% of the electorate did not do. What is their state of mind? Have some of them given up on life and feel nobody will listen to them? America has a very high rate of depression and this benefits the pharmaceutical companies. The solution involves doing what many people in denial refuse to do. Taking a long cold hard look at yourself and being realistic about the state of your personality and making some changes to it which will help live a happier life. Some people are afraid of doing this. Family and having a support network helps people a lot as does exercise and enjoying the simple things. Perhaps we can learn from the communities that live on some Japanese and Greek islands. They also have a healthy diet and no takeaways!
Think of all the blacks voting for Harris. Then look at the level of dysfunction in their communities.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
If Trump wins, Ukraine will go nuclear.
I think this is right, and it's where the real risk of nuclear war lies.
People are naive if they think the US and Europe have total discretion with respect to Ukraine. They are not simply going to give up in the face of being abandoned, and meekly accept Russian conquest and national annihilation.
Ukraine will reach to whatever tools they can to fight for their independence. If they are capable of making nuclear weapons then they will, and if they are to use them to establish a credible deterrence then they will have to prove that they are functional and detonate one. At that point there's a high risk of a Russian retaliation and a large-scale nuclear exchange, depending on how many operational nukes each side has.
Nonsense. Russia will be in Kyiv in 6 months as the ukraine army collapses.
Ministers are to take take a direct role in overseeing the building of the HS2 rail line to try to "get a grip" on the rising cost of the high speed route between London and Birmingham.
The government also confirmed it will not reinstate previous plans to run the high-speed line to Crewe and Manchester, which were scrapped under the previous Conservative government.
I'm having a strong premonition that taking a 'direct role' to 'get a grip' on things will lead to some arbitrary changes and decisions which either increases costs further or causes entirely forseeable problems as a result. Or both.
Is that based on what happens. every single time, politicians decide they are going to intervene to fix things?
NHS IT system waves....
And promptly breaks? I mean, I bet the system has problems with handshaking, never mind waving.
It's gradually evolving into the modern era.
I don't use paper notes anymore, though outpatient prescriptions and pathology requests are still on paper.
All imaging, referrals, clinical notes and inpatient prescribing is electronic, as is communication with GPs.
Admittedly these are on seperate software so need multiple tabs open, but it all works, and these are gradually being merged into one system, so evolution rather than revolution.
Outpatient appointment booking is on a rather archaic HISS system that antedates my time in the NHS I think, but that too is shortly to be integrated into the overall system.
The biggest problem is the slowness of bandwidth on the terminals and hospital WiFi, but these too are gradually improving.
The problems come when the hospital servers fail, as it did for a couple of hours midweek, and we had to down tools for the duration as unable to access any records or imaging.
There is also the assumption that all patients have a smartphone, it seems that the software engineers assume every granny has one. It seems that is Streetings assumption too:
That still doesn't exactly sound modern or cutting edge. In the time the NHS IT system has been worked on, 20+ years now, companies have managed to make similar transitions in a few years. Even small businesses can just buy most of that tech stack off the shelf, let alone when you see a big modern organisation not only runs, but speed of development e.g. Amazon. Yes its more complicated with health, but still.
Couple of years ago I had a fall in the street and an ambulance was summoned. The team had tablets on which were my details, so it's happening.
On the other hand blood tests are done at the nearest hospital, which is a different NHS area to my GP. So results have to taken from the lab and emailed to the surgery. They can't be automatically sent.
Again, this has been standard for most businesses for ages, its not exactly cutting edge, its more like 2015. The ipad was released 15 years ago. Logging into to get some details is 101 stuff and only now its just starting to happen.
Yes health is complicated, but still needing 27 different tabs open to access all the different disjoint system, poor internet speeds, still requiring paper for a load of things...that is not a modern system.
Yep, the NHS’s admin remains utterly shocking. And @Foxy should not seek to excuse it or explain it away. The raging disconnect in the system costs £££ in wasted time each and every day, and quite possibly costs lives too. Paper shouldn’t be a factor. At all.
I am not excusing it at all, just showing that there has been progress.
One problem for the NHS has been the so-called prioritisation of "front line workers" meaning a gradual deteriorating admin situation in terms of staffing and infrastructure. Often this is achieved by dumping admin tasks onto those "frontline workers", so Mrs Foxy (whose IT skills are limited to Social Media) has to wrestle with an electronic stock control system rather than get on with nursing.
I don't think it's a good idea to put everything online. I'd be happier if my medical records stayed on a paper record in a filing cabinet in the local GP surgery.
LOL
So when you get wheeled into A&E, your allergy to an antibiotic is not known….
Oh well, we can always get more posters on PB. Made by unskilled labour in 9 months etc….
Well precisely. I like @Andy_JS and his and our benefit I would hope his health details were, er, stored on a centrally accessible NHS database!
I don't think it's a good idea to put everything online. I'd be happier if my medical records stayed on a paper record in a filing cabinet in the local GP surgery.
All your personal information is already online.
Or not. When my father was in hospital, recently, they tried hiding the bloodwork - it wasn’t entered into the system. Then the family couldn’t see it - patient confidentiality. Despite the patient actually asking for the data….
When they finally gave it to us - even I could see issues. Classic dehydration, for a start.
Well I nearly came a cropper with the paperwork being both online and on paper. I reported it here at the time. It was this year that I had a really minor op (local anaesthetic, takes 5 min) for trigger finger. So they wheeled in the computer and paper file and confirmed my name and date of birth. All confirmed ok. Then mentioned I was allergic to penicillin to which I said no. They then said according to the notes I had a severe reaction when I had pancreatitis to which I said I have never had that. At which point I got up to look at the notes. The computer records were me, but the notes were for someone else with the same name, but a completely different date of birth. They had confirm stuff on the computer and then referred to the paper notes.
I joked about the fact that it was a good job I was going to be awake as I didn't want to lose a leg. My name and date of birth were confirmed endlessly after that as per normal, but we managed to pass that test previously by using two sets of records that weren't the same.
Which is precisely why we do the checks on identity so repetitively, recognising that errors will creep in, and computer systems are just as prone to these.
Every time something happened which we were told would dent Trump's popularity, like 6th January, I thought to myself this isn't going to make much difference to his level of support: because people aren't voting for him for positive reasons. It's almost entirely a protest vote. The only way to reduce his support is by tackling the root causes of the problems in the US.
They dont care that Trumps an a.sehole. They just hate the liberal elites and want to hurt them.
I believe you are correct and they are mainly unhappy people that are unable to do anything about making themselves content and will always play the blame game. They need to look at themselves and see where they can make improvements to their personality and improve their mental health which definitely needs rebalancing.
You are talking about at least 45% of the us population. This isnt some tiny minority.
We know in the last Trump election 52% of the voters eligible to vote did so. 48% of the electorate did not do. What is their state of mind? Have some of them given up on life and feel nobody will listen to them? America has a very high rate of depression and this benefits the pharmaceutical companies. The solution involves doing what many people in denial refuse to do. Taking a long cold hard look at yourself and being realistic about the state of your personality and making some changes to it which will help live a happier life. Some people are afraid of doing this. Family and having a support network helps people a lot as does exercise and enjoying the simple things. Perhaps we can learn from the communities that live on some Japanese and Greek islands. They also have a healthy diet and no takeaways!
Think of all the blacks voting for Harris. Then look at the level of dysfunction in their communities.
I remember touring the South side of Chicago years ago. It felt like the communities have been abandoned by the government there. I had a friend that left the area and did well for himself. If you can do something about the environment you start your life in if there is no hope leave and start again elsewhere he told me.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
If Trump wins, Ukraine will go nuclear.
I think this is right, and it's where the real risk of nuclear war lies.
People are naive if they think the US and Europe have total discretion with respect to Ukraine. They are not simply going to give up in the face of being abandoned, and meekly accept Russian conquest and national annihilation.
Ukraine will reach to whatever tools they can to fight for their independence. If they are capable of making nuclear weapons then they will, and if they are to use them to establish a credible deterrence then they will have to prove that they are functional and detonate one. At that point there's a high risk of a Russian retaliation and a large-scale nuclear exchange, depending on how many operational nukes each side has.
Nonsense. Russia will be in Kyiv in 6 months as the ukraine army collapses.
3 days, Shirley?
At least that's what Vlad the Inhaler said before his army had 600k+ killed and wounded trying to achieve it.
Yep, the NHS’s admin remains utterly shocking. And @Foxy should not seek to excuse it or explain it away. The raging disconnect in the system costs £££ in wasted time each and every day, and quite possibly costs lives too. Paper shouldn’t be a factor. At all.
Forget paper. Recently a letter from a consultant was sent electronically, but "filed" by the staff at the GP without reading it. It was only because a relative also received a copy that they knew to follow up and ask why nothing had been done. i.e. Read the bloody letter and do what it says.
Scary isn’t it? The amount of times I have had to tell various consultants their own information because of my elderly relative… well I have lost count.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that way the IT systems and associated processes operate must lead to hundreds or even thousands of unnecessary deaths per year. It's so easy for things to fall through the gaps.
That the system works at all is only due to dedication and care on the part of staff (being very thorough to check what they are doing and follow up) and also to patients and their families effectively nudging the system from the outside. If you have a clinician or administrator working in a haphazard fashion, or you are not competent yourself, or you have no family to look out for you, it would be very easy for things to go wrong.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Exactly. Why exactly would we get heavily involved? It is a scandal that we're as heavily involved as we are. David Lammy lobbing them £600 million without any benefit to even our arms industry was surely the nadir.
We are doing it because it is right to fight fascism. And if we do not fight it in Ukraine, we will be fighting it elsewhere, when Russia and its allies are stronger.
It is a simple equation: spend less blood and treasure now, or a great deal more blood and treasure later.
I would prefer to spend nothing now, and spend nothing later - *except* exploit our own energy sources so we're no longer at the whims of the oil and gas market, bolster our own defences including missile defences and our naval fleet, and reinstate a truly independent nuclear programme so we could *actually* respond to the threat of a nuclear strike. Those things would strengthen us vs. Russia or anyone else.
That's the we-are-an-island fallacy.
Well, we obviously are an island, but we are not in terms of resources - and neither can we be. Even if we do without all the plastic tat coming from China, we still need those lovely chips from America and Taiwan, along with food and a million and one other things. If we allow fascism to spread, there will come a time when those resources we need are no longer available.
We cannot pull the drawbridge up against the world. And that means we will eventually need to intervene to protect our interests. And it is better to do that now than later.
Then there's the moral issue: one you routinely ignore.
I haven't said we should be self sufficient in everything - yes a portion of our defence spending will always be on foreign tech, but for obvious reasons, that should be within limited parameters. A pillar of our defence that is controlled by a third party is not a pillar of our defence - it's a pillar of their defence.
Russia is a nasty, thuggish state. But I don't see them as a threat to Britain or our world interests (such as they are).
Counter to the NHS chat: Australian IT systems are significantly worse than ours (they still use fax machines) yet they have much better outcomes.
I think the fundamentals are much more important for health spending. We have a deeply unhealthy population and don't invest enough in prevention.
Its seems that IT procurement is just the an obvious effect of deconstructing the NHS monolith. If you want competing trusts than this is sort of what you'll get. Disparate technology solutions that don't mesh well.
Its a little perverse that most of the PB privatisers want to have the benefits of a unified technological monolith and yet the introduction of more competing interests. Of course In my grossly ill-informed and simple mind, a way around this is more open data standards then even if Oracle et al fuck you, there is hope.
Quite like the tangibility and personal nature of a cheque. Something of a thrill in cashing it too.
Hope they don't entirely die out.
If you want the keep the funds in your account for a few extra days, or if you are paying someone who has provided inferior or tardy service, a cheque, posted second class, is ideal. “The electronic transfer is in the post” doesn’t work nearly as well.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
If Trump wins, Ukraine will go nuclear.
I think this is right, and it's where the real risk of nuclear war lies.
People are naive if they think the US and Europe have total discretion with respect to Ukraine. They are not simply going to give up in the face of being abandoned, and meekly accept Russian conquest and national annihilation.
Ukraine will reach to whatever tools they can to fight for their independence. If they are capable of making nuclear weapons then they will, and if they are to use them to establish a credible deterrence then they will have to prove that they are functional and detonate one. At that point there's a high risk of a Russian retaliation and a large-scale nuclear exchange, depending on how many operational nukes each side has.
Nonsense. Russia will be in Kyiv in 6 months as the ukraine army collapses.
3 days, Shirley?
At least that's what Vlad the Inhaler said before his army had 600k+ killed and wounded trying to achieve it.
THREAD: Donald Trump is clearly fading mentally and physically. His running mate was handpicked by a Kremlin-agent white supremacist (Tucker Carlson) and two creepy far-right billionaire techno-authoritarians (Peter Thiel and Elon Musk).
This is not the election you think. 7:25 PM · Oct 19, 2024 · 3M Views
Elon Musk will be U.S. co-president if Trump wins... not with Trump, but with Peter Thiel.
J.D. Vance, who—again—is in a cult in which Peter Thiel is his mentor and superior and which is headed by Curtis Yarvin, would simply be the executor of a techno-authoritarian agenda. 7:44 PM · Oct 19, 2024 · 83.3K Views
THREAD: Donald Trump is clearly fading mentally and physically. His running mate was handpicked by a Kremlin-agent white supremacist (Tucker Carlson) and two creepy far-right billionaire techno-authoritarians (Peter Thiel and Elon Musk).
This is not the election you think. 7:25 PM · Oct 19, 2024 · 3M Views
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Exactly. Why exactly would we get heavily involved? It is a scandal that we're as heavily involved as we are. David Lammy lobbing them £600 million without any benefit to even our arms industry was surely the nadir.
We are doing it because it is right to fight fascism. And if we do not fight it in Ukraine, we will be fighting it elsewhere, when Russia and its allies are stronger.
It is a simple equation: spend less blood and treasure now, or a great deal more blood and treasure later.
I would prefer to spend nothing now, and spend nothing later - *except* exploit our own energy sources so we're no longer at the whims of the oil and gas market, bolster our own defences including missile defences and our naval fleet, and reinstate a truly independent nuclear programme so we could *actually* respond to the threat of a nuclear strike. Those things would strengthen us vs. Russia or anyone else.
Is this plan within NATO or outside it? Either way it will cost a bit more than nothing, either now or later.
I think they are achievable within the increases of defence spending envisaged by the Tories, as long as defence spending is treated as spending to defend, not a just a bung to the US.
We had independent tactical nukes (which is what I am talking about) until relatively recently - I am not sure it was a particularly expensive programme.
France still has independent tactical nukes and has always taken a relatively independent Foreign policy of the US since De Gaulle
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
If Trump wins, Ukraine will go nuclear.
I think this is right, and it's where the real risk of nuclear war lies.
People are naive if they think the US and Europe have total discretion with respect to Ukraine. They are not simply going to give up in the face of being abandoned, and meekly accept Russian conquest and national annihilation.
Ukraine will reach to whatever tools they can to fight for their independence. If they are capable of making nuclear weapons then they will, and if they are to use them to establish a credible deterrence then they will have to prove that they are functional and detonate one. At that point there's a high risk of a Russian retaliation and a large-scale nuclear exchange, depending on how many operational nukes each side has.
Nonsense. Russia will be in Kyiv in 6 months as the ukraine army collapses.
In 6 months, Russia will have no tanks, no armoured personnel carriers, no artillery.
The only troops it wil have will be North Korean. Who will surrender.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Exactly. Why exactly would we get heavily involved? It is a scandal that we're as heavily involved as we are. David Lammy lobbing them £600 million without any benefit to even our arms industry was surely the nadir.
We are doing it because it is right to fight fascism. And if we do not fight it in Ukraine, we will be fighting it elsewhere, when Russia and its allies are stronger.
It is a simple equation: spend less blood and treasure now, or a great deal more blood and treasure later.
I would prefer to spend nothing now, and spend nothing later - *except* exploit our own energy sources so we're no longer at the whims of the oil and gas market, bolster our own defences including missile defences and our naval fleet, and reinstate a truly independent nuclear programme so we could *actually* respond to the threat of a nuclear strike. Those things would strengthen us vs. Russia or anyone else.
That's the we-are-an-island fallacy.
Well, we obviously are an island, but we are not in terms of resources - and neither can we be. Even if we do without all the plastic tat coming from China, we still need those lovely chips from America and Taiwan, along with food and a million and one other things. If we allow fascism to spread, there will come a time when those resources we need are no longer available.
We cannot pull the drawbridge up against the world. And that means we will eventually need to intervene to protect our interests. And it is better to do that now than later.
Then there's the moral issue: one you routinely ignore.
I haven't said we should be self sufficient in everything - yes a portion of our defence spending will always be on foreign tech, but for obvious reasons, that should be within limited parameters. A pillar of our defence that is controlled by a third party is not a pillar of our defence - it's a pillar of their defence.
Russia is a nasty, thuggish state. But I don't see them as a threat to Britain or our world interests (such as they are).
Have you been paying attention to what Putin and his lackeys have been saying about this country? It isn't positive. Russia is a threat to us, and our interests.
We are already at war with Russia, and have been for some time. It is a cold war, and I hope it remains so, but there is no point in denying that fact.
telling you: the scale of Elon’s intervention into this election is without precedent. He’s pushing every envelope: running the Trump field operation, buying votes with million dollar lotteries, flooding House races with cash and even AI-generated ads.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
Taiwan at least will know Trump would damage China economically by imposing massive tariffs on Chinese imports, even more so than in his first administration
Elon Musk will be U.S. co-president if Trump wins... not with Trump, but with Peter Thiel.
J.D. Vance, who—again—is in a cult in which Peter Thiel is his mentor and superior and which is headed by Curtis Yarvin, would simply be the executor of a techno-authoritarian agenda. 7:44 PM · Oct 19, 2024 · 83.3K Views
This sounds extremely positive for the human race. Looking forward to it! You have 100% certainty that this is the future?
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
If Trump wins, Ukraine will go nuclear.
I think this is right, and it's where the real risk of nuclear war lies.
People are naive if they think the US and Europe have total discretion with respect to Ukraine. They are not simply going to give up in the face of being abandoned, and meekly accept Russian conquest and national annihilation.
Ukraine will reach to whatever tools they can to fight for their independence. If they are capable of making nuclear weapons then they will, and if they are to use them to establish a credible deterrence then they will have to prove that they are functional and detonate one. At that point there's a high risk of a Russian retaliation and a large-scale nuclear exchange, depending on how many operational nukes each side has.
Nonsense. Russia will be in Kyiv in 6 months as the ukraine army collapses.
In 6 months, Russia will have no tanks, no armoured personnel carriers, no artillery.
The only troops it wil have will be North Korean. Who will surrender.
telling you: the scale of Elon’s intervention into this election is without precedent. He’s pushing every envelope: running the Trump field operation, buying votes with million dollar lotteries, flooding House races with cash and even AI-generated ads.
The thing is that, when people get excised about this, they fail to see it is, in effect, tit for tat.
Why, for example. is this any more dishonest than Democrat-aligned Super PACs in 2022 deliberately spending millions of dollars in Republican primaries to ensure that the most extreme candidates won and so ensuring, in many cases, that moderates were pushed out of winnable campaigns because these super PACs thought extreme candidates would be easier to beat come the elections?
Have you been paying attention to what Putin and his lackeys have been saying about this country? It isn't positive. Russia is a threat to us, and our interests.
We are already at war with Russia, and have been for some time. It is a cold war, and I hope it remains so, but there is no point in denying that fact.
Russia is suspected of sending incendiary devices via freight forwarders that have been transported on aircraft. It appears to be mere luck that no aircraft has been brought down yet, but there have been two reported fires, in Germany and the UK, that occurred in July.
The only way that the Tories can make enough gains to get close to a majority at the next election they need to do two things. 1) Reconcile the divide in the right by merging with or destroying the reform party 2) have policies which can take centre or centre right votes off the Lib Dems.
Even the best leader in the world would struggle to do both of those but Jenrick and Badenoch will struggle to do one of them.
I don't think the Conservatives will manage (1) as long as Farage is around. I think their real hope is he disappears. Europe is littered with the remains of Centre Right parties that have at inconsistently tried to co-opt and beat far right alternatives.
If they can't beat them they may well join with them, Forza Italia are now in government with Lega Nord and Brothers of Italy, the Spanish Popular Party in alliance with Vox and the Moderates in Sweden in government with the Sweden Democrats for instance
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
Taiwan at least will know Trump would damage China economically by imposing massive tariffs on Chinese imports, even more so than in his first administration
Really. You are completely sure of what you write? We do have a few profets of doom on here who are experts in misery. I am not entirely sure you are correct good sir. You tell a good tale though. Time we tell if you right or wrong.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Exactly. Why exactly would we get heavily involved? It is a scandal that we're as heavily involved as we are. David Lammy lobbing them £600 million without any benefit to even our arms industry was surely the nadir.
We are doing it because it is right to fight fascism. And if we do not fight it in Ukraine, we will be fighting it elsewhere, when Russia and its allies are stronger.
It is a simple equation: spend less blood and treasure now, or a great deal more blood and treasure later.
I would prefer to spend nothing now, and spend nothing later - *except* exploit our own energy sources so we're no longer at the whims of the oil and gas market, bolster our own defences including missile defences and our naval fleet, and reinstate a truly independent nuclear programme so we could *actually* respond to the threat of a nuclear strike. Those things would strengthen us vs. Russia or anyone else.
That's the we-are-an-island fallacy.
Well, we obviously are an island, but we are not in terms of resources - and neither can we be. Even if we do without all the plastic tat coming from China, we still need those lovely chips from America and Taiwan, along with food and a million and one other things. If we allow fascism to spread, there will come a time when those resources we need are no longer available.
We cannot pull the drawbridge up against the world. And that means we will eventually need to intervene to protect our interests. And it is better to do that now than later.
Then there's the moral issue: one you routinely ignore.
I haven't said we should be self sufficient in everything - yes a portion of our defence spending will always be on foreign tech, but for obvious reasons, that should be within limited parameters. A pillar of our defence that is controlled by a third party is not a pillar of our defence - it's a pillar of their defence.
Russia is a nasty, thuggish state. But I don't see them as a threat to Britain or our world interests (such as they are).
If Russia (big and tooled up and aggressively anti west and on the edge of Europe) is no threat to Britain then I guess Britain has no threats. Excellent news!
I notice Wes Streeting announcement of smart watches (Leon just wet himself) and smart rings. Details of this will be interesting.
I have ethical objections to allowing the State to strap a tracking device to me. I am continually saddened by nominally-right-wing people who like a Government that increases/encourage datagathering and monitoring private information and selling it to private individuals. The Government are treating us like a resource to be exploited, not citizens to be served.
I don't think it's a good idea to put everything online. I'd be happier if my medical records stayed on a paper record in a filing cabinet in the local GP surgery.
In general we are placing a lot of reliance on systems that are open to attack. In a similar way the smartphone, if it became a problem, would be a major one.
Mine will be the last generation who realises that this is odd:
A smartphone is: bank, newspaper, magazines, supermarket, multi-retailer and department store, car distributor, postal service, telephone, library and reference library, TV, radio, CD player, work conference, camera, video recorder, church, university of the 3rd and any age, archive, filing cabinet, dating agency.
Excellent, that should make us more open to civilizational collapse.
Having watched doctors using the IT systems in a large hospital quite a bit recently I'm amazed by how disorganised it is, lacking integration and automation, and requiring far too much manual control. And this was in a hospital where observations go straight into the system by scanning a barcode on the patients wrist, the doctors use PCs on carts with Wi-Fi connections, the ambulances have iPads to get patient records etc.
My ophthalmology consultant has two separate PCs on his desk, one to access my records and one to view OCT scans. Apparently the two pieces of software cannot run on the same system (one PC was running Windows 7, presumably for compatibility reasons). There's no link between the systems, so he has to write scan details down on a pad then type them into the records PC.
There's also no way for him to make an appointment as that's a separate system. He writes the details of any future tests and appointments on a post-it which I take to reception. A 30 year career in IT means it's damn near physically painful for me to experience this kind of depressingly shit setup.
And I won't even start on how my GP surgery only accepts prescription requests via an answerphone machine that's switched on for a few hours each morning.
Have you been paying attention to what Putin and his lackeys have been saying about this country? It isn't positive. Russia is a threat to us, and our interests.
We are already at war with Russia, and have been for some time. It is a cold war, and I hope it remains so, but there is no point in denying that fact.
Russia is suspected of sending incendiary devices via freight forwarders that have been transported on aircraft. It appears to be mere luck that no aircraft has been brought down yet, but there have been two reported fires, in Germany and the UK, that occurred in July.
I don't think it's a good idea to put everything online. I'd be happier if my medical records stayed on a paper record in a filing cabinet in the local GP surgery.
In general we are placing a lot of reliance on systems that are open to attack. In a similar way the smartphone, if it became a problem, would be a major one.
Mine will be the last generation who realises that this is odd:
A smartphone is: bank, newspaper, magazines, supermarket, multi-retailer and department store, car distributor, postal service, telephone, library and reference library, TV, radio, CD player, work conference, camera, video recorder, church, university of the 3rd and any age, archive, filing cabinet, dating agency.
Excellent, that should make us more open to civilizational collapse.
Brillant! Do you remember Samuel L Jackson in Kingsman. Controlling the human race threw the smart phone?
Have you been paying attention to what Putin and his lackeys have been saying about this country? It isn't positive. Russia is a threat to us, and our interests.
We are already at war with Russia, and have been for some time. It is a cold war, and I hope it remains so, but there is no point in denying that fact.
Russia is suspected of sending incendiary devices via freight forwarders that have been transported on aircraft. It appears to be mere luck that no aircraft has been brought down yet, but there have been two reported fires, in Germany and the UK, that occurred in July.
With all the furore over Arnie's penis I missed this. No doubt Trumpers will start bleating about an obscure libtard calling Donald a bit of a rascal 4 years ago.
telling you: the scale of Elon’s intervention into this election is without precedent. He’s pushing every envelope: running the Trump field operation, buying votes with million dollar lotteries, flooding House races with cash and even AI-generated ads.
The thing is that, when people get excised about this, they fail to see it is, in effect, tit for tat.
Why, for example. is this any more dishonest than Democrat-aligned Super PACs in 2022 deliberately spending millions of dollars in Republican primaries to ensure that the most extreme candidates won and so ensuring, in many cases, that moderates were pushed out of winnable campaigns because these super PACs thought extreme candidates would be easier to beat come the elections?
I'm sure Democrats will engage in some questionable tactics. I'm fairly confident some will try some baseless lawsuits in a few places, now that is normalised. Many decry what various SC cases have permitted, but push comes to shove then feel the need to pursue tactics open to them.
Doesn't make GOP voters less responsible for their own choices however.
I don't think it's a good idea to put everything online. I'd be happier if my medical records stayed on a paper record in a filing cabinet in the local GP surgery.
In general we are placing a lot of reliance on systems that are open to attack. In a similar way the smartphone, if it became a problem, would be a major one.
Mine will be the last generation who realises that this is odd:
A smartphone is: bank, newspaper, magazines, supermarket, multi-retailer and department store, car distributor, postal service, telephone, library and reference library, TV, radio, CD player, work conference, camera, video recorder, church, university of the 3rd and any age, archive, filing cabinet, dating agency.
Excellent, that should make us more open to civilizational collapse.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Aside from Poland and France I'm not sure there's a European country that would fight.
We would but we don't want to pay for mass so it'd be tokenistic and the high kinetic nature of a war would probably render us combat ineffective inside 6 weeks.
I notice Wes Streeting announcement of smart watches (Leon just wet himself) and smart rings. Details of this will be interesting.
I have ethical objections to allowing the State to strap a tracking device to me. I am continually saddened by nominally-right-wing people who like a Government that increases/encourage datagathering and monitoring private information and selling it to private individuals. The Government are treating us like a resource to be exploited, not citizens to be served.
They aren't going to force you to wear one, and there is no obligation to use the NHS.
You can avoid all government tracking and gain more health benefits by riding a bike.
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Aside from Poland and France I'm not sure there's a European country that would fight.
We would but we don't want to pay for mass so it'd be tokenistic and the high kinetic nature of a war would probably render us combat ineffective inside 6 weeks.
The never ending polls. Time to call the election. Harris for the win.
I think on the latest polls Trump to win the popular vote nationally, Harris to scrape home in the EC by holding Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Michigan must be a possibility. Remember even John Kerry won those 3 states despite losing the popular vote to Bush by 2% and this time while Trump will win Florida and Ohio like Bush did, Harris will probably hold Nevada and Colorado and New Mexico which Bush also won in 2004 and could scrape her over the line this time (after all even Hillary won those 3 too).
Unlike 2016 the Democrats are ruthlessly focusing in on swing states with big GOTV efforts and sending Obama to Pennsylvania and Arizona, Bill Clinton to Georgia etc while Trump is doing a Hillary 2016 and wasting time in California with big donors (while California is a huge boost in winning the national popular vote it is useless in winning the EC). Whereas in 2016 he relentlessly focused on rallies in Michigan and Arizona and Pennsylvania etc
There’s been some poor polling for Harris over recent days .
TIPP when it was with IBD was pretty accurate last time has shown her dropping back . The caveat though is if you read their site this cycle it’s really a daily anti Harris diatribe of articles and their state polling has shown some weird turnouts in urban areas .
Last night Atlas Intel which again was okay last time dropped a poll with Trump 3 points ahead , the same as a few weeks back.
Their state polling was a mixed bag with some good and bad news for Harris which really didn’t fit with the national poll.
We should get lots of new polling next week . In terms of early vote , that’s looking a bit ropey for Harris but what’s complicating things is the GOP are now pushing early and mail in vote . This means the Election Day vote is likely to be less red and those early votes are likely to be less deep blue .
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Exactly. Why exactly would we get heavily involved? It is a scandal that we're as heavily involved as we are. David Lammy lobbing them £600 million without any benefit to even our arms industry was surely the nadir.
We are doing it because it is right to fight fascism. And if we do not fight it in Ukraine, we will be fighting it elsewhere, when Russia and its allies are stronger.
It is a simple equation: spend less blood and treasure now, or a great deal more blood and treasure later.
I would prefer to spend nothing now, and spend nothing later - *except* exploit our own energy sources so we're no longer at the whims of the oil and gas market, bolster our own defences including missile defences and our naval fleet, and reinstate a truly independent nuclear programme so we could *actually* respond to the threat of a nuclear strike. Those things would strengthen us vs. Russia or anyone else.
That's the we-are-an-island fallacy.
Well, we obviously are an island, but we are not in terms of resources - and neither can we be. Even if we do without all the plastic tat coming from China, we still need those lovely chips from America and Taiwan, along with food and a million and one other things. If we allow fascism to spread, there will come a time when those resources we need are no longer available.
We cannot pull the drawbridge up against the world. And that means we will eventually need to intervene to protect our interests. And it is better to do that now than later.
Then there's the moral issue: one you routinely ignore.
I haven't said we should be self sufficient in everything - yes a portion of our defence spending will always be on foreign tech, but for obvious reasons, that should be within limited parameters. A pillar of our defence that is controlled by a third party is not a pillar of our defence - it's a pillar of their defence.
Russia is a nasty, thuggish state. But I don't see them as a threat to Britain or our world interests (such as they are).
Have you been paying attention to what Putin and his lackeys have been saying about this country? It isn't positive. Russia is a threat to us, and our interests.
We are already at war with Russia, and have been for some time. It is a cold war, and I hope it remains so, but there is no point in denying that fact.
The reason we are not liked is that our fish and chips is of poor quality these days.
There's also no way for him to make an appointment as that's a separate system. He writes the details of any future tests and appointments on a post-it which I take to reception. A 30 year career in IT means it's damn near physically painful for me to experience this kind of depressingly shit setup.
It's exasperating to see all the expensive IT kit that exists, and then realise that the actual systems are terrible. I suspect that as well as the terrible procurement of IT, and the fragmented structure of the NHS, quite a bit of how badly it operates is down to the demarcation of roles, and professions being unwilling to see bits of their jobs carved out for others to do, or even worse automated.
With all the furore over Arnie's penis I missed this. No doubt Trumpers will start bleating about an obscure libtard calling Donald a bit of a rascal 4 years ago.
With all the furore over Arnie's penis I missed this. No doubt Trumpers will start bleating about an obscure libtard calling Donald a bit of a rascal 4 years ago.
There’s been some poor polling for Harris over recent days .
TIPP when it was with IBD was pretty accurate last time has shown her dropping back . The caveat though is if you read their site this cycle it’s really a daily anti Harris diatribe of articles and their state polling has shown some weird turnouts in urban areas .
Last night Atlas Intel which again was okay last time dropped a poll with Trump 3 points ahead , the same as a few weeks back.
Their state polling was a mixed bag with some good and bad news for Harris which really didn’t fit with the national poll.
We should get lots of new polling next week . In terms of early vote , that’s looking a bit ropey for Harris but what’s complicating things is the GOP are now pushing early and mail in vote . This means the Election Day vote is likely to be less red and those early votes are likely to be less deep blue .
Atlas yet further evidence of a Trump wins the national popular vote, Harris scrapes a win in the EC possibility
If (when) Trump wins we have some very serious decisions to make.
It has to be doubtful that NATO, the cornerstone of our defence policy since WW2, will survive in its current form.
Western Europe will have to make a decision about whether they are willing to support Ukraine sufficiently in the absence of American support. This would be a major financial effort.
We have to decide how we respond to his absurd Tariff policies. In many respects we are already in a post GATT world given the consistent US blocking of new judges to the court but this would rip away any pretense.
We may have the USA in the same category as China, where we are nervous about having significant parts of our IT infrastructure dependent on them.
Taiwan and SK will, if anything, be even more scared than western Europe.
So massive increases in defence spending for less security than we enjoy now, a much more hands on role in a major European war, a major increase in economic instability and a world where dictators get to do what they want provided they say Donald is a nice guy. Overall, I consider this to be suboptimal.
I think Europe will just let Ukraine go in this instance. The financial cost is too much.
Aside from Poland and France I'm not sure there's a European country that would fight.
We would but we don't want to pay for mass so it'd be tokenistic and the high kinetic nature of a war would probably render us combat ineffective inside 6 weeks.
There’s been some poor polling for Harris over recent days .
TIPP when it was with IBD was pretty accurate last time has shown her dropping back . The caveat though is if you read their site this cycle it’s really a daily anti Harris diatribe of articles and their state polling has shown some weird turnouts in urban areas .
Last night Atlas Intel which again was okay last time dropped a poll with Trump 3 points ahead , the same as a few weeks back.
Their state polling was a mixed bag with some good and bad news for Harris which really didn’t fit with the national poll.
We should get lots of new polling next week . In terms of early vote , that’s looking a bit ropey for Harris but what’s complicating things is the GOP are now pushing early and mail in vote . This means the Election Day vote is likely to be less red and those early votes are likely to be less deep blue .
Atlas yet further evidence of a Trump wins the national popular vote, Harris scrapes a win in the EC possibility
Oh what fun for the people emphasising the popular vote margins in 2016 and 2020.
The only way that the Tories can make enough gains to get close to a majority at the next election they need to do two things. 1) Reconcile the divide in the right by merging with or destroying the reform party 2) have policies which can take centre or centre right votes off the Lib Dems.
Even the best leader in the world would struggle to do both of those but Jenrick and Badenoch will struggle to do one of them.
I don't think the Conservatives will manage (1) as long as Farage is around. I think their real hope is he disappears. Europe is littered with the remains of Centre Right parties that have at inconsistently tried to co-opt and beat far right alternatives.
If they can't beat them they may well join with them, Forza Italia are now in government with Lega Nord and Brothers of Italy, the Spanish Popular Party in alliance with Vox and the Moderates in Sweden in government with the Sweden Democrats for instance
This would be an option for the Conservatives in a PR electoral system. The Berlusconi Party is also very much a junior partner in the Italian coalition.
The only way that the Tories can make enough gains to get close to a majority at the next election they need to do two things. 1) Reconcile the divide in the right by merging with or destroying the reform party 2) have policies which can take centre or centre right votes off the Lib Dems.
Even the best leader in the world would struggle to do both of those but Jenrick and Badenoch will struggle to do one of them.
I don't think the Conservatives will manage (1) as long as Farage is around. I think their real hope is he disappears. Europe is littered with the remains of Centre Right parties that have at inconsistently tried to co-opt and beat far right alternatives.
If they can't beat them they may well join with them, Forza Italia are now in government with Lega Nord and Brothers of Italy, the Spanish Popular Party in alliance with Vox and the Moderates in Sweden in government with the Sweden Democrats for instance
This would be an option for the Conservatives in a PR electoral system. The Berlusconi Party is also very much a junior partner in the Italian coalition.
The only way that the Tories can make enough gains to get close to a majority at the next election they need to do two things. 1) Reconcile the divide in the right by merging with or destroying the reform party 2) have policies which can take centre or centre right votes off the Lib Dems.
Even the best leader in the world would struggle to do both of those but Jenrick and Badenoch will struggle to do one of them.
I don't think the Conservatives will manage (1) as long as Farage is around. I think their real hope is he disappears. Europe is littered with the remains of Centre Right parties that have at inconsistently tried to co-opt and beat far right alternatives.
If they can't beat them they may well join with them, Forza Italia are now in government with Lega Nord and Brothers of Italy, the Spanish Popular Party in alliance with Vox and the Moderates in Sweden in government with the Sweden Democrats for instance
This would be an option for the Conservatives in a PR electoral system. The Berlusconi Party is also very much a junior partner in the Italian coalition.
Indeed but FI still has ministers in Meloni's government, even in a worst case scenario under PR where Reform overtook the Tories you could see Jenrick as Home Secretary and Badenoch as Business Secretary for example in a Farage Government
There’s been some poor polling for Harris over recent days .
TIPP when it was with IBD was pretty accurate last time has shown her dropping back . The caveat though is if you read their site this cycle it’s really a daily anti Harris diatribe of articles and their state polling has shown some weird turnouts in urban areas .
Last night Atlas Intel which again was okay last time dropped a poll with Trump 3 points ahead , the same as a few weeks back.
Their state polling was a mixed bag with some good and bad news for Harris which really didn’t fit with the national poll.
We should get lots of new polling next week . In terms of early vote , that’s looking a bit ropey for Harris but what’s complicating things is the GOP are now pushing early and mail in vote . This means the Election Day vote is likely to be less red and those early votes are likely to be less deep blue .
Where are you seeing that early voting isn't looking good for Harris?
There’s been some poor polling for Harris over recent days .
TIPP when it was with IBD was pretty accurate last time has shown her dropping back . The caveat though is if you read their site this cycle it’s really a daily anti Harris diatribe of articles and their state polling has shown some weird turnouts in urban areas .
Last night Atlas Intel which again was okay last time dropped a poll with Trump 3 points ahead , the same as a few weeks back.
Their state polling was a mixed bag with some good and bad news for Harris which really didn’t fit with the national poll.
We should get lots of new polling next week . In terms of early vote , that’s looking a bit ropey for Harris but what’s complicating things is the GOP are now pushing early and mail in vote . This means the Election Day vote is likely to be less red and those early votes are likely to be less deep blue .
Where are you seeing that early voting isn't looking good for Harris?
The only way that the Tories can make enough gains to get close to a majority at the next election they need to do two things. 1) Reconcile the divide in the right by merging with or destroying the reform party 2) have policies which can take centre or centre right votes off the Lib Dems.
Even the best leader in the world would struggle to do both of those but Jenrick and Badenoch will struggle to do one of them.
I don't think the Conservatives will manage (1) as long as Farage is around. I think their real hope is he disappears. Europe is littered with the remains of Centre Right parties that have at inconsistently tried to co-opt and beat far right alternatives.
If they can't beat them they may well join with them, Forza Italia are now in government with Lega Nord and Brothers of Italy, the Spanish Popular Party in alliance with Vox and the Moderates in Sweden in government with the Sweden Democrats for instance
This would be an option for the Conservatives in a PR electoral system. The Berlusconi Party is also very much a junior partner in the Italian coalition.
Suppose it's a PR system, and the Tories get 35% and the LDs and Reform 16% each, who would the Tories want as partners?
And the pictures he's replaced them with are *hideous*, if the images on Twitter are correct. Shakespeare also represents a lot about this country. The supposed replacements... less so.
The only way that the Tories can make enough gains to get close to a majority at the next election they need to do two things. 1) Reconcile the divide in the right by merging with or destroying the reform party 2) have policies which can take centre or centre right votes off the Lib Dems.
Even the best leader in the world would struggle to do both of those but Jenrick and Badenoch will struggle to do one of them.
I don't think the Conservatives will manage (1) as long as Farage is around. I think their real hope is he disappears. Europe is littered with the remains of Centre Right parties that have at inconsistently tried to co-opt and beat far right alternatives.
If they can't beat them they may well join with them, Forza Italia are now in government with Lega Nord and Brothers of Italy, the Spanish Popular Party in alliance with Vox and the Moderates in Sweden in government with the Sweden Democrats for instance
This would be an option for the Conservatives in a PR electoral system. The Berlusconi Party is also very much a junior partner in the Italian coalition.
Suppose it's a PR system, and the Tories get 35% and the LDs and Reform 16% each, who would the Tories want as partners?
The haters at Reform. The Lib Dems would want to impose too many conditions. Reform would prefer just to celebrate at the Spoons and have a knees up.
I am afraid I don't see AtlasIntel as a serious pollster. We can argue if they are voodoo pollsters or just very Rep-aligned. TIPP have been a serious pollster but always at the Rep end. They have shown a lurch to the Reps of 6 points over the last few days on their rolling poll which seems rather improbable if not impossible.
The early voting trends are being pored over for hints. Dems and Reps both profess to like what they are seeing so take that for what its worth - probably nothing. Certainly record early polling in GA and NC might be of note. The gender imbalance is also notable.
However, a week ago I said the polling points to a Trump victory and this week has solidified that if only by tiny margins in a supposedly very tight race. Its absolutely within the margin of error and it will come down to parties ability to GOTV.
And the pictures he's replaced them with are *hideous*, if the images on Twitter are correct. Shakespeare also represents a lot about this country. The supposed replacements... less so.
I don't think the decor needs to represent much, so taking specific ones down who cares, but the new ones are't my cup of tea.
The only way that the Tories can make enough gains to get close to a majority at the next election they need to do two things. 1) Reconcile the divide in the right by merging with or destroying the reform party 2) have policies which can take centre or centre right votes off the Lib Dems.
Even the best leader in the world would struggle to do both of those but Jenrick and Badenoch will struggle to do one of them.
I don't think the Conservatives will manage (1) as long as Farage is around. I think their real hope is he disappears. Europe is littered with the remains of Centre Right parties that have at inconsistently tried to co-opt and beat far right alternatives.
If they can't beat them they may well join with them, Forza Italia are now in government with Lega Nord and Brothers of Italy, the Spanish Popular Party in alliance with Vox and the Moderates in Sweden in government with the Sweden Democrats for instance
This would be an option for the Conservatives in a PR electoral system. The Berlusconi Party is also very much a junior partner in the Italian coalition.
Indeed, the problems with that are the electoral system and that in the popular imagination we had our 'Revolt on the Right' and it's seen to have failed by enough of the population to form a very effective blocking coalition.
I don't think it's a good idea to put everything online. I'd be happier if my medical records stayed on a paper record in a filing cabinet in the local GP surgery.
In general we are placing a lot of reliance on systems that are open to attack. In a similar way the smartphone, if it became a problem, would be a major one.
Mine will be the last generation who realises that this is odd:
A smartphone is: bank, newspaper, magazines, supermarket, multi-retailer and department store, car distributor, postal service, telephone, library and reference library, TV, radio, CD player, work conference, camera, video recorder, church, university of the 3rd and any age, archive, filing cabinet, dating agency.
Excellent, that should make us more open to civilizational collapse.
The really frightening thing is that the chips are designed by people like Mrs J (*), and the software coded by people like me...
Be scared. Be very scared.
(*) A few years ago, Mrs J had circuitry in all common types of phone: Apple, Samsung, MS/Nokia, Android clones, etc, etc. There's probably a lot of 'new' phones that still contain it.
There’s been some poor polling for Harris over recent days .
TIPP when it was with IBD was pretty accurate last time has shown her dropping back . The caveat though is if you read their site this cycle it’s really a daily anti Harris diatribe of articles and their state polling has shown some weird turnouts in urban areas .
Last night Atlas Intel which again was okay last time dropped a poll with Trump 3 points ahead , the same as a few weeks back.
Their state polling was a mixed bag with some good and bad news for Harris which really didn’t fit with the national poll.
We should get lots of new polling next week . In terms of early vote , that’s looking a bit ropey for Harris but what’s complicating things is the GOP are now pushing early and mail in vote . This means the Election Day vote is likely to be less red and those early votes are likely to be less deep blue .
Where are you seeing that early voting isn't looking good for Harris?
I'm on Team Harris but that poll showing her +8 in Michigan looks like bullfinch.
I am with you on Harris. The polls I do not fully trust. We will have to wait till after the big day!
Interestingly Activote now has Harris doing 1% better than Biden did with white voters and 5% better with white voters than Hillary did.
Yet Harris does 17% worse with black voters than Hillary did and 16% worse with black voters than Biden did and 9% worse with Latinos than Biden and 21% worse with Latinos than Hillary.
So it looks like she will probably lose Arizona, Georgia and NC to Trump but could still scrape home if she holds the rustbelt swing states and Nevada
I notice Wes Streeting announcement of smart watches (Leon just wet himself) and smart rings. Details of this will be interesting.
I have ethical objections to allowing the State to strap a tracking device to me. I am continually saddened by nominally-right-wing people who like a Government that increases/encourage datagathering and monitoring private information and selling it to private individuals. The Government are treating us like a resource to be exploited, not citizens to be served.
Just wait and see what's in store once programmable money is a thing.
It will start with people on benefits. Not allowed to buy alcohol and so on. And people will acquiesce to it because they think why should my hard earned tax money be going to bunch of jobless alkies.
But then it will come for the rest of us. Drinking too much? You'll have a choice - go on the 'no buying alcohol plan' or lose the right to NHS treatment. Not a drinker, but a bit of a fatty? Cards blocked from fast food shops and takeaways.
People not switching to EVs fast enough? Your card will stop working when you buy more than £100 of petrol a month. And so on, and so forth.
And we will all be told it's for our own good, of course.
I don't think it's a good idea to put everything online. I'd be happier if my medical records stayed on a paper record in a filing cabinet in the local GP surgery.
In general we are placing a lot of reliance on systems that are open to attack. In a similar way the smartphone, if it became a problem, would be a major one.
Mine will be the last generation who realises that this is odd:
A smartphone is: bank, newspaper, magazines, supermarket, multi-retailer and department store, car distributor, postal service, telephone, library and reference library, TV, radio, CD player, work conference, camera, video recorder, church, university of the 3rd and any age, archive, filing cabinet, dating agency.
Excellent, that should make us more open to civilizational collapse.
The really frightening thing is that the chips are designed by people like Mrs J (*), and the software coded by people like me...
Be scared. Be very scared.
(*) A few years ago, Mrs J had circuitry in all common types of phone: Apple, Samsung, MS/Nokia, Android clones, etc, etc. There's probably a lot of 'new' phones that still contain it.
As I got somewhat beaten up here about Boris Johnson's position on Amazon Charts, I notice he has dropped to third place one week in in the most sold non fiction list
The only way that the Tories can make enough gains to get close to a majority at the next election they need to do two things. 1) Reconcile the divide in the right by merging with or destroying the reform party 2) have policies which can take centre or centre right votes off the Lib Dems.
Even the best leader in the world would struggle to do both of those but Jenrick and Badenoch will struggle to do one of them.
I don't think the Conservatives will manage (1) as long as Farage is around. I think their real hope is he disappears. Europe is littered with the remains of Centre Right parties that have at inconsistently tried to co-opt and beat far right alternatives.
If they can't beat them they may well join with them, Forza Italia are now in government with Lega Nord and Brothers of Italy, the Spanish Popular Party in alliance with Vox and the Moderates in Sweden in government with the Sweden Democrats for instance
This would be an option for the Conservatives in a PR electoral system. The Berlusconi Party is also very much a junior partner in the Italian coalition.
Suppose it's a PR system, and the Tories get 35% and the LDs and Reform 16% each, who would the Tories want as partners?
Jenrick or Badenoch would prefer Reform no question.
Had it been Tugendhat or Cleverly who won the Tory leadership they would have preferred the LDs
I notice Wes Streeting announcement of smart watches (Leon just wet himself) and smart rings. Details of this will be interesting.
I have ethical objections to allowing the State to strap a tracking device to me. I am continually saddened by nominally-right-wing people who like a Government that increases/encourage datagathering and monitoring private information and selling it to private individuals. The Government are treating us like a resource to be exploited, not citizens to be served.
Just wait and see what's in store once programmable money is a thing.
It will start with people on benefits. Not allowed to buy alcohol and so on. And people will acquiesce to it because they think why should my hard earned tax money be going to bunch of jobless alkies.
But then it will come for the rest of us. Drinking too much? You'll have a choice - go on the 'no buying alcohol plan' or lose the right to NHS treatment. Not a drinker, but a bit of a fatty? Cards blocked from fast food shops and takeaways.
People not switching to EVs fast enough? Your card will stop working when you buy more than £100 of petrol a month. And so on, and so forth.
And we will all be told it's for our own good, of course.
So this will deal with the government's spending black hole. I get it.
I notice Wes Streeting announcement of smart watches (Leon just wet himself) and smart rings. Details of this will be interesting.
I have ethical objections to allowing the State to strap a tracking device to me. I am continually saddened by nominally-right-wing people who like a Government that increases/encourage datagathering and monitoring private information and selling it to private individuals. The Government are treating us like a resource to be exploited, not citizens to be served.
Just wait and see what's in store once programmable money is a thing.
It will start with people on benefits. Not allowed to buy alcohol and so on. And people will acquiesce to it because they think why should my hard earned tax money be going to bunch of jobless alkies.
But then it will come for the rest of us. Drinking too much? You'll have a choice - go on the 'no buying alcohol plan' or lose the right to NHS treatment. Not a drinker, but a bit of a fatty? Cards blocked from fast food shops and takeaways.
People not switching to EVs fast enough? Your card will stop working when you buy more than £100 of petrol a month. And so on, and so forth.
And we will all be told it's for our own good, of course.
So this will deal with the government's spending black hole. I get it.
The only way that the Tories can make enough gains to get close to a majority at the next election they need to do two things. 1) Reconcile the divide in the right by merging with or destroying the reform party 2) have policies which can take centre or centre right votes off the Lib Dems.
Even the best leader in the world would struggle to do both of those but Jenrick and Badenoch will struggle to do one of them.
I don't think the Conservatives will manage (1) as long as Farage is around. I think their real hope is he disappears. Europe is littered with the remains of Centre Right parties that have at inconsistently tried to co-opt and beat far right alternatives.
If they can't beat them they may well join with them, Forza Italia are now in government with Lega Nord and Brothers of Italy, the Spanish Popular Party in alliance with Vox and the Moderates in Sweden in government with the Sweden Democrats for instance
This would be an option for the Conservatives in a PR electoral system. The Berlusconi Party is also very much a junior partner in the Italian coalition.
Suppose it's a PR system, and the Tories get 35% and the LDs and Reform 16% each, who would the Tories want as partners?
Jenrick or Badenoch would prefer Reform no question.
Had it been Tugendhat or Cleverly who won the Tory leadership they would have preferred the LDs
I completely agree with you. Still by the next election who will be leading the Tory party?
I don't think it's a good idea to put everything online. I'd be happier if my medical records stayed on a paper record in a filing cabinet in the local GP surgery.
In general we are placing a lot of reliance on systems that are open to attack. In a similar way the smartphone, if it became a problem, would be a major one.
Mine will be the last generation who realises that this is odd:
A smartphone is: bank, newspaper, magazines, supermarket, multi-retailer and department store, car distributor, postal service, telephone, library and reference library, TV, radio, CD player, work conference, camera, video recorder, church, university of the 3rd and any age, archive, filing cabinet, dating agency.
Excellent, that should make us more open to civilizational collapse.
And the pictures he's replaced them with are *hideous*, if the images on Twitter are correct. Shakespeare also represents a lot about this country. The supposed replacements... less so.
I don't have a view on appropriate art for the walls of Downing Street but I actually like the Paula Rego paintings.
I'm on Team Harris but that poll showing her +8 in Michigan looks like bullfinch.
I am with you on Harris. The polls I do not fully trust. We will have to wait till after the big day!
Interestingly Activote now has Harris doing 1% better than Biden did with white voters and 5% better with white voters than Hillary did.
Yet Harris does 17% worse with black voters than Hillary did and 16% worse with black voters than Biden did and 9% worse with Latinos than Biden and 21% worse with Latinos than Hillary.
So it looks like she will probably lose Arizona, Georgia and NC to Trump but could still scrape home if she holds the rustbelt swing states and Nevada
As I got somewhat beaten up here about Boris Johnson's position on Amazon Charts, I notice he has dropped to third place one week in in the most sold non fiction list
Surely we could get air superiority over Ukraine in concert with others?
Air superiority over Ukraine is of only limited usefulness, as the Russians are so effing incompetent that they are flying many miles away from the border and sending glide bombs to hit civilians. it might be that to get 'air superiority' over a battlefield like Ukraine, we would need to cleanse the skies a hundred miles into Russia. Which might be problematic, though possible.
But as ever, air power is only useful when part of a larger strategy.
Personally, I'd like to see the Russian airfield malletted.
I notice Wes Streeting announcement of smart watches (Leon just wet himself) and smart rings. Details of this will be interesting.
I have ethical objections to allowing the State to strap a tracking device to me. I am continually saddened by nominally-right-wing people who like a Government that increases/encourage datagathering and monitoring private information and selling it to private individuals. The Government are treating us like a resource to be exploited, not citizens to be served.
Just wait and see what's in store once programmable money is a thing.
It will start with people on benefits. Not allowed to buy alcohol and so on. And people will acquiesce to it because they think why should my hard earned tax money be going to bunch of jobless alkies.
But then it will come for the rest of us. Drinking too much? You'll have a choice - go on the 'no buying alcohol plan' or lose the right to NHS treatment. Not a drinker, but a bit of a fatty? Cards blocked from fast food shops and takeaways.
People not switching to EVs fast enough? Your card will stop working when you buy more than £100 of petrol a month. And so on, and so forth.
And we will all be told it's for our own good, of course.
The real problem with this is that the vast majority will approve it enthusiastically and clamour for it. Just look at all the judgey commentary around how other people choose to spend their money, whether it's trainers, Sky subscriptions, or anything really, let alone alcohol, tobacco or junk food.
And the pictures he's replaced them with are *hideous*, if the images on Twitter are correct. Shakespeare also represents a lot about this country. The supposed replacements... less so.
I don't have a view on appropriate art for the walls of Downing Street but I actually like the Paula Rego paintings.
I don't, but I understand tastes vary. However, they say f-all about the UK. Shakespeare does.
Comments
I can't see any reason for him to go back to a shark infested paddling pool.
You don't save yourself from a bear by giving it half a pound of sausages.
I think the fundamentals are much more important for health spending. We have a deeply unhealthy population and don't invest enough in prevention.
One problem for the NHS has been the so-called prioritisation of "front line workers" meaning a gradual deteriorating admin situation in terms of staffing and infrastructure. Often this is achieved by dumping admin tasks onto those "frontline workers", so Mrs Foxy (whose IT skills are limited to Social Media) has to wrestle with an electronic stock control system rather than get on with nursing.
At least that's what Vlad the Inhaler said before his army had 600k+ killed and wounded trying to achieve it.
Obviously, he remains a Master Strategist.
As President Trump prepares for his final battle against the deep state globalists for the US presidency, will you stand with us and
#PRAYFORTHEPRESIDENT
Join us here on spaces every morning 3:00AM GMT until November 5th
https://x.com/1111Sophia1111/status/1847911375378555388
That the system works at all is only due to dedication and care on the part of staff (being very thorough to check what they are doing and follow up) and also to patients and their families effectively nudging the system from the outside. If you have a clinician or administrator working in a haphazard fashion, or you are not competent yourself, or you have no family to look out for you, it would be very easy for things to go wrong.
Russia is a nasty, thuggish state. But I don't see them as a threat to Britain or our world interests (such as they are).
Its a little perverse that most of the PB privatisers want to have the benefits of a unified technological monolith and yet the introduction of more competing interests. Of course In my grossly ill-informed and simple mind, a way around this is more open data standards then even if Oracle et al fuck you, there is hope.
THREAD: Donald Trump is clearly fading mentally and physically. His running mate was handpicked by a Kremlin-agent white supremacist (Tucker Carlson) and two creepy far-right billionaire techno-authoritarians (Peter Thiel and Elon Musk).
This is not the election you think.
7:25 PM · Oct 19, 2024
·
3M
Views
https://x.com/SethAbramson/status/1847705710206857270
J.D. Vance, who—again—is in a cult in which Peter Thiel is his mentor and superior and which is headed by Curtis Yarvin, would simply be the executor of a techno-authoritarian agenda.
7:44 PM · Oct 19, 2024
·
83.3K
Views
The only troops it wil have will be North Korean. Who will surrender.
We are already at war with Russia, and have been for some time. It is a cold war, and I hope it remains so, but there is no point in denying that fact.
https://x.com/whstancil/status/1847828309448573360
Why, for example. is this any more dishonest than Democrat-aligned Super PACs in 2022 deliberately spending millions of dollars in Republican primaries to ensure that the most extreme candidates won and so ensuring, in many cases, that moderates were pushed out of winnable campaigns because these super PACs thought extreme candidates would be easier to beat come the elections?
There's also no way for him to make an appointment as that's a separate system. He writes the details of any future tests and appointments on a post-it which I take to reception. A 30 year career in IT means it's damn near physically painful for me to experience this kind of depressingly shit setup.
And I won't even start on how my GP surgery only accepts prescription requests via an answerphone machine that's switched on for a few hours each morning.
Wisconsin
Harris 50% Trump 47%
Pennsylvania
Harris 49% Trump 48%
Michigan
Harris 53% Trump 45%
https://www.thebullfinchgroup.com/post/your-election-guide-for-the-midrust-battlegrounds
Activote National
Trump 51% Harris 49%
https://www.activote.net/trump-extends-lead/
Georgia
Trump 51% Harris 49%
https://www.activote.net/trump-narrowly-ahead-in-georgia-2/
No doubt Trumpers will start bleating about an obscure libtard calling Donald a bit of a rascal 4 years ago.
Acyn
@Acyn
Trump: You’re a shit Vice President
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1847771237071876513
Doesn't make GOP voters less responsible for their own choices however.
You can avoid all government tracking and gain more health benefits by riding a bike.
Unlike 2016 the Democrats are ruthlessly focusing in on swing states with big GOTV efforts and sending Obama to Pennsylvania and Arizona, Bill Clinton to Georgia etc while Trump is doing a Hillary 2016 and wasting time in California with big donors (while California is a huge boost in winning the national popular vote it is useless in winning the EC). Whereas in 2016 he relentlessly focused on rallies in Michigan and Arizona and Pennsylvania etc
TIPP when it was with IBD was pretty accurate last time has shown her dropping back . The caveat though is if you read their site this cycle it’s really a daily anti Harris diatribe of articles and their state polling has shown some weird turnouts in urban areas .
Last night Atlas Intel which again was okay last time dropped a poll with Trump 3 points ahead , the same as a few weeks back.
Their state polling was a mixed bag with some good and bad news for Harris which really didn’t fit with the national poll.
We should get lots of new polling next week . In terms of early vote , that’s looking a bit ropey for Harris but what’s complicating things is the GOP are now pushing early and mail in vote . This means the Election Day vote is likely to be less red and those early votes are likely to be less deep blue .
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/10/18/shakespeare-latest-victim-downing-street-purge-portraits/
The early voting trends are being pored over for hints. Dems and Reps both profess to like what they are seeing so take that for what its worth - probably nothing. Certainly record early polling in GA and NC might be of note. The gender imbalance is also notable.
However, a week ago I said the polling points to a Trump victory and this week has solidified that if only by tiny margins in a supposedly very tight race. Its absolutely within the margin of error and it will come down to parties ability to GOTV.
Be scared. Be very scared.
(*) A few years ago, Mrs J had circuitry in all common types of phone: Apple, Samsung, MS/Nokia, Android clones, etc, etc. There's probably a lot of 'new' phones that still contain it.
Yet Harris does 17% worse with black voters than Hillary did and 16% worse with black voters than Biden did and 9% worse with Latinos than Biden and 21% worse with Latinos than Hillary.
So it looks like she will probably lose Arizona, Georgia and NC to Trump but could still scrape home if she holds the rustbelt swing states and Nevada
It will start with people on benefits. Not allowed to buy alcohol and so on. And people will acquiesce to it because they think why should my hard earned tax money be going to bunch of jobless alkies.
But then it will come for the rest of us. Drinking too much? You'll have a choice - go on the 'no buying alcohol plan' or lose the right to NHS treatment. Not a drinker, but a bit of a fatty? Cards blocked from fast food shops and takeaways.
People not switching to EVs fast enough? Your card will stop working when you buy more than £100 of petrol a month. And so on, and so forth.
And we will all be told it's for our own good, of course.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/charts/2024-10-13/mostsold/nonfiction?ref=chrt_bk_dx_intra_sd_nf
Had it been Tugendhat or Cleverly who won the Tory leadership they would have preferred the LDs
But as ever, air power is only useful when part of a larger strategy.
Personally, I'd like to see the Russian airfield malletted.