On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
Personally, I think there's a big gap in the field for the Lib Dems (which is, after all, why I joined them), as an alternative voice of sense. But it's not an easy sell.
Unfortunately their leader is best remembered as a silly stunt.
Has any government of a rich democratic country shown how to increase trust, make everyone richer and get reelected?
I think the Merkel government did quite well on those metrics, until the refugee crisis in 2015.
But we can see that the tide has gone out, in multiple ways, on the economy she benefited from (building capital goods for a growing Chinese economy and diesel cars for Europe, using cheap Russian gas).
Which is to say that, even in the unlikely event that you hit upon a combination of policies that work in the short term, the world keeps on changing, and countries and leaders have to keep on changing to keep up. Which is why it's important that we retain the ability to kick out our leaders and to criticise them really quite harshly.
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
Well, the strength of the LDs will be tested in May, if the Tory county councils are brave enough to hold elections.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
No 10 clarifies position that Reeves will be chancellor for the whole parliament
Starmer is hopeless at politics
I think rather the opposite. Completely the right decision, and completely right to bang it out there.
He shouldn't have got in the position no 10 had to clarify it
She is IT though - she is Labour's economic policy. There's nobody that can pick up the reins should she be dismissed. Reeves is far far better than Brown or Balls or any of the other Labour jokers. Labour have after all suggested that Annalise Dodds, and John McDonnell would be worthy of handling the nation's finances.
On what basis is the Customer Complaints Manager better than Balls or Brown FFS? Interested to understand your logic there. So far she has not been Brown or Balls but she has succeeded in making an absolute balls of the economy and the business confidence that drives it.
Well, as said below, she is being honest.
No she isnt
She invented a £20 bn hole to give herself cover to ram up taxes and pay her mates in the public sector.
That now counts against as her statements cannot be taken at face value
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
Personally, I think there's a big gap in the field for the Lib Dems (which is, after all, why I joined them), as an alternative voice of sense. But it's not an easy sell.
I agree that there is. I’m not a natural Lib Dem voter (so take what I say with a pinch of salt) but this is what I’d suggest:
1) Davey needs to come out more strongly against Labour now. They are the government, the Lib Dems are an opposition force, stop the mood music around broadly welcoming their aims and be a bit more punchy about the fact they’re failing.
2) Come up with some interesting policies. Expose the Tories for a lack of certainty/vision. Dont just pledge to reverse everything Labour do but claim you can still have the benefit. Have some eye-catching stuff. You can work out the full details later, the key thing is getting a policy out there. Don’t get drawn on costings. Going with the structural reform stuff would be a great angle IMHO - doing the things the other parties won’t do.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
With this lot it will be no problem as they - provide so much ammunition a veritable cornucopia of incompetence
The harder issue is will you PB lefties be able to go the distance justifying the unjustifiable.
This Labour government is worse than a shit sandwich, it’s an all you can eat shit buffet of shit, followed by a Henrician banquet of shit, with shit covered swans stuffed with shit, stuffed with shit covered starlings force fed on shit, the whole shitty evening rounded off by a compulsory shit-pizza-eating contest held in a shit-covered shit-house, compèred by a total shit with a shit eating grin
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
Well, the strength of the LDs will be tested in May, if the Tory county councils are brave enough to hold elections.
The Lib Dem seat count in both Westminster and council elections is much more closely correlated to the inverse of Tory vote share than to Lib Dem vote share, so that’s the main thing for them to focus on.
They are not up against a Reform challenge in any significant region, and where they hold seats in areas of Green strength it’s the rural NIMBY version of the greens rather than the Gaza BJO version.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
Dunno, we’ve managed to keep the pile-on for the Tories going for about 5 years (plus some depending on your viewpoint).
I listened to some of Starmer's AI speech as I drove to the pool today. Leaving aside the content, his delivery is awful. It might work in a court or meeting, but it just doesn't work when he has to deliver a message to the public, or sell a policy.
He should really have got this sorted years ago. Thatcher had voice coaching, as I recall.
I can't even listen to his shuttlecock caught in his Adam's apple voice.
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
Personally, I think there's a big gap in the field for the Lib Dems (which is, after all, why I joined them), as an alternative voice of sense. But it's not an easy sell.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
The party that gave us four Chancellors and three Prime Ministers in the space of a few weeks in 2022.
Perhaps they are missing the strong and stable halcyon days of that glorious summer and autumn of 2022.
This Labour government is worse than a shit sandwich, it’s an all you can eat shit buffet of shit, followed by a Henrician banquet of shit, with shit covered swans stuffed with shit, stuffed with shit covered starlings force fed on shit, the whole shitty evening rounded off by a compulsory shit-pizza-eating contest held in a shit-covered shit-house, compèred by a total shit with a shit eating grin
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
Do you not have any worries of just what this potential financial crisis has on ordinary people trying to pay for their increasing mortgages, higher energy bills, and cutting services they depend on largely due to Reeves disaster of a budget ?
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I was part of this: but I think my point is pertinent. It might be advantageous to Starmer and Labour to address it, although it might be a little too late now.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
Do you not have any worries of just what this potential financial crisis has on ordinary people trying to pay for their increasing mortgages, higher energy bills, and cutting services they depend on largely due to Reeves disaster of a budget ?
No. Largely because what you say isn't really accurate.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
Do you not have any worries of just what this potential financial crisis has on ordinary people trying to pay for their increasing mortgages, higher energy bills, and cutting services they depend on largely due to Reeves disaster of a budget ?
No. Largely because what you say isn't really accurate.
I listened to some of Starmer's AI speech as I drove to the pool today. Leaving aside the content, his delivery is awful. It might work in a court or meeting, but it just doesn't work when he has to deliver a message to the public, or sell a policy.
He should really have got this sorted years ago. Thatcher had voice coaching, as I recall.
I can't even listen to his shuttlecock caught in his Adam's apple voice.
As soon as he comes on I turn the radio off.
It’s funny how some voices grate.
I used to find Boris’s quite awful. All that waffle and wiffle. Really started to wind me up.
Sunak’s I liked. May, Cameron were fine. Truss sounded like she was a child reading the phone book slowly - very weird. Brown’s vocal timbre was quite reassuring and solid (I found what he said annoying). The one that changed for me was Blair. For a long time I didn’t mind his weird vocal mannerisms and then there reached a point where it drove me to utter apoplexy every time he started talking. Never minded Thatcher’s - though if you were an opponent I could see how it would annoy.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
Do you not have any worries of just what this potential financial crisis has on ordinary people trying to pay for their increasing mortgages, higher energy bills, and cutting services they depend on largely due to Reeves disaster of a budget ?
Is it 'largely' due to that? Or largely because the country is in a dire financial state, and so far she hasn't helped that?
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
Do you not have any worries of just what this potential financial crisis has on ordinary people trying to pay for their increasing mortgages, higher energy bills, and cutting services they depend on largely due to Reeves disaster of a budget ?
No. Largely because what you say isn't really accurate.
Mysterious how the bond markets decided Rachel's budget was shit two months later. I'm sure Trump threatening tariffs on just about anyone has nothing to do with it.
No 10 clarifies position that Reeves will be chancellor for the whole parliament
Starmer is hopeless at politics
I think rather the opposite. Completely the right decision, and completely right to bang it out there.
He shouldn't have got in the position no 10 had to clarify it
She is IT though - she is Labour's economic policy. There's nobody that can pick up the reins should she be dismissed. Reeves is far far better than Brown or Balls or any of the other Labour jokers. Labour have after all suggested that Annalise Dodds, and John McDonnell would be worthy of handling the nation's finances.
Dodds was shadow chancellor before Reeves and she was hopeless. Reeves was light years ahead of her.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
Do you not have any worries of just what this potential financial crisis has on ordinary people trying to pay for their increasing mortgages, higher energy bills, and cutting services they depend on largely due to Reeves disaster of a budget ?
Is it 'largely' due to that? Or largely because the country is in a dire financial state, and so far she hasn't helped that?
In truth Reeves has been unlucky because rising interest rates worldwide on concerns that Trump's policies will be inflationary are happening, as are bond rates increasing our debt payments, but add in a budget that hammered business whilst enriching train drivers and others has created a problem that was avoidable if Reeves had concentrated on reducing taxes on business, increase standard rate tax to circa 25% but abolish NI, add more council tax bands, and means test discounts on EV so the rich pay their share as they are no different than wealthy pensioners who do not need the WFA
Furthermore adopt Dilnot now
No doubt there are other ideas, but Reeves fundamentally handed money to the public sector before she had achieved the growth to pay for it
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
Do you not have any worries of just what this potential financial crisis has on ordinary people trying to pay for their increasing mortgages, higher energy bills, and cutting services they depend on largely due to Reeves disaster of a budget ?
No. Largely because what you say isn't really accurate.
Mysterious how the bond markets decided Rachel's budget was shit two months later. I'm sure Trump threatening tariffs on just about anyone has nothing to do with it.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
British expats will be forced to pay 100pc tax on their holiday home in Spain under new measures to fix the country’s housing crisis.
Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, announced 12 reforms amid an ongoing row over the impact of foreigners on local house prices.
This includes the introduction of a tax for those from outside the European Union (EU) who do not currently live in Spain.
Proposals from the Spanish government suggest this levy could be as high as 100pc of the value of the home, much higher than current rates. Real estate purchases in Spain are currently subject to 10pc tax on newly-built homes and 6pc on old properties.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
An example that should resonate with Labour supporters is Thatcher and the poll tax.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
Would Rishi have really made us 'Trump-proof'?
Rishi wouldn't have: (a) paid to surrender British territory to a foreign power in hock to China (b) not committed to Reparations (c) not asked the Unions to name their price and (d) not sent Tory party staffers to campaign for the Democrats.
So, for political and economic resilience: yeah, it certainly would have helped.
Bill Clinton understood the importance of delivery. While he was president, he was taking lessons from a drama coach from one of the Ivy League schools. The coach came down to the White House once a month, as I recall.
Famously, Mrs Thatcher had voice coaching. Some of us on PB have recommended today's politicians seek similar from the drama schools that sell short courses to business people.
Heseltine too. It wasn't an accident that he was such an impressive platform speaker. Few people are truly naturals when it comes to presenting themselves - surprising that do msny politicians disregard such an essential skill.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
Would Rishi have really made us 'Trump-proof'?
Almost certainly not. I'm not arguing for any party. I'm just a bit perplexed that the possibility of Trump winning again doesn't seem to have had as much effect as I would have hoped it would.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
Would Rishi have really made us 'Trump-proof'?
Rishi wouldn't have: (a) paid to surrender British territory to a foreign power in hock to China (b) not committed to Reparations (c) not asked the Unions to name their price and (d) not sent Tory party staffers to campaign for the Democrats.
So, for political and economic resilience: yeah, it certainly would have helped.
True, but they're pretty thin gruel as benefits go. The Sunak Government was better than this lot for sure. But they weren't better enough to be actually good.
I listened to some of Starmer's AI speech as I drove to the pool today. Leaving aside the content, his delivery is awful. It might work in a court or meeting, but it just doesn't work when he has to deliver a message to the public, or sell a policy.
He should really have got this sorted years ago. Thatcher had voice coaching, as I recall.
He can do sober and serious.
He is absolutely appalling at selling a vision.
He could be announcing the magic gun policy that would get the economy booming, fix the NHS and education, give us a world beating railway service, abolish income tax and ban pineapple on pizzas and it would still sound like the lamest policy imaginable.
If he isn't excited by what he's saying, why should anyone else be?
It's sad that it matter, but it does. Blair could do it well; so could Cameron. May was better than Brown; even Sunak was better than Starmer in this regard - though all he had to sell was some rancid butter.
I'm sorry but Starmer's issues are not presentational. He is presiding over an authoritarian approach to free speech, a lamentable lack of action on genuine crime, a massive increase in boat arrivals, taxes that are putting people out of business, an energy policy that's destroying the economy and impoverishing consumers in favour of windmill owning sovereign wealth funds, and bunging £9bn at someone for them to take a colony from us. He could be a mixture of Joanna Lumley and Mary Berry and he still wouldn't be able to sell that turd sandwich.
But in twelve months time when Reeves is gone and we're desperate for cash we can always sell the BBC to Elon Musk
I genuinely wonder what the BBC would fetch if sold. It has quite a library of past programmes, that would bring in some good money. But as a going concern?
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
I agree with you. Though it's not what I said - quite the opposite.
Bill Clinton understood the importance of delivery. While he was president, he was taking lessons from a drama coach from one of the Ivy League schools. The coach came down to the White House once a month, as I recall.
This Labour government is worse than a shit sandwich, it’s an all you can eat shit buffet of shit, followed by a Henrician banquet of shit, with shit covered swans stuffed with shit, stuffed with shit covered starlings force fed on shit, the whole shitty evening rounded off by a compulsory shit-pizza-eating contest held in a shit-covered shit-house, compèred by a total shit with a shit eating grin
Impressive journalism. Every phrase has meaning, every aside an insight.
Just a reminder it is just one week to Trump !!!!!!
Maybe there should be a thread on which potential executive order will provoke the most hysteria.
Joe Biden about to give a press conference live on Sky
"My fellow Americans, I have today instructed Seal Team 6 to take out Trump, his family, all his proposed politcal appointees. And anyone who donated to his political campaign.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
Would Rishi have really made us 'Trump-proof'?
Rishi wouldn't have: (a) paid to surrender British territory to a foreign power in hock to China (b) not committed to Reparations (c) not asked the Unions to name their price and (d) not sent Tory party staffers to campaign for the Democrats.
So, for political and economic resilience: yeah, it certainly would have helped.
On d), if Rishi had sent Tory staffers to campaign for the Democrats alongside Labour then maybe Harris would have waltzed home. But I believe Tories usually campaign for the Republicans.
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
Personally, I think there's a big gap in the field for the Lib Dems (which is, after all, why I joined them), as an alternative voice of sense. But it's not an easy sell.
I agree that there is. I’m not a natural Lib Dem voter (so take what I say with a pinch of salt) but this is what I’d suggest:
1) Davey needs to come out more strongly against Labour now. They are the government, the Lib Dems are an opposition force, stop the mood music around broadly welcoming their aims and be a bit more punchy about the fact they’re failing.
2) Come up with some interesting policies. Expose the Tories for a lack of certainty/vision. Dont just pledge to reverse everything Labour do but claim you can still have the benefit. Have some eye-catching stuff. You can work out the full details later, the key thing is getting a policy out there. Don’t get drawn on costings. Going with the structural reform stuff would be a great angle IMHO - doing the things the other parties won’t do.
With 72 MPs the LibDems ought now to be promoting serious policies with an eye to the next election. Conservatives are divided and flailing; Labour disheartened. Where is Brave Sir Ed? Whether or not anyone agrees with their positioning, even Reform is saying more about the state of the country and they've only got four MPs and that bloke off the frequent flyer adverts.
This Labour government is worse than a shit sandwich, it’s an all you can eat shit buffet of shit, followed by a Henrician banquet of shit, with shit covered swans stuffed with shit, stuffed with shit covered starlings force fed on shit, the whole shitty evening rounded off by a compulsory shit-pizza-eating contest held in a shit-covered shit-house, compèred by a total shit with a shit eating grin
Impressive journalism. Every phrase has meaning, every aside an insight.
This Labour government is worse than a shit sandwich, it’s an all you can eat shit buffet of shit, followed by a Henrician banquet of shit, with shit covered swans stuffed with shit, stuffed with shit covered starlings force fed on shit, the whole shitty evening rounded off by a compulsory shit-pizza-eating contest held in a shit-covered shit-house, compèred by a total shit with a shit eating grin
Impressive journalism. Every phrase has meaning, every aside an insight.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
Bill Clinton understood the importance of delivery. While he was president, he was taking lessons from a drama coach from one of the Ivy League schools. The coach came down to the White House once a month, as I recall.
Famously, Mrs Thatcher had voice coaching. Some of us on PB have recommended today's politicians seek similar from the drama schools that sell short courses to business people.
Heseltine too. It wasn't an accident that he was such an impressive platform speaker. Few people are truly naturals when it comes to presenting themselves - surprising that do msny politicians disregard such an essential skill.
How often do politicians need to deliver anything beyond a soundbite? How often would most face consequences for presenting poorly anyway?
It's a concern for those in the top positions, but you can easily get to the top without being good at it. And in fairness the handful of more compelling speakers are far from guaranteed to be decent in other respects, so there's not a great deal of incentive to be good at it.
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
Personally, I think there's a big gap in the field for the Lib Dems (which is, after all, why I joined them), as an alternative voice of sense. But it's not an easy sell.
I agree that there is. I’m not a natural Lib Dem voter (so take what I say with a pinch of salt) but this is what I’d suggest:
1) Davey needs to come out more strongly against Labour now. They are the government, the Lib Dems are an opposition force, stop the mood music around broadly welcoming their aims and be a bit more punchy about the fact they’re failing.
2) Come up with some interesting policies. Expose the Tories for a lack of certainty/vision. Dont just pledge to reverse everything Labour do but claim you can still have the benefit. Have some eye-catching stuff. You can work out the full details later, the key thing is getting a policy out there. Don’t get drawn on costings. Going with the structural reform stuff would be a great angle IMHO - doing the things the other parties won’t do.
With 72 MPs the LibDems ought now to be promoting serious policies with an eye to the next election. Conservatives are divided and flailing; Labour disheartened. Where is Brave Sir Ed? Whether or not anyone agrees with their positioning, even Reform is saying more about the state of the country and they've only got four MPs and that bloke off the frequent flyer adverts.
The LDs have always struggled for attention, but it is a bit more inexplicable when they they had such an impressive result at the GE and even in terms of seats are not that far behind the Tories now.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Just a reminder it is just one week to Trump !!!!!!
Maybe there should be a thread on which potential executive order will provoke the most hysteria.
Joe Biden about to give a press conference live on Sky
"My fellow Americans, I have today instructed Seal Team 6 to take out Trump, his family, all his proposed politcal appointees. And anyone who donated to his political campaign.
Because the Supreme Court said I could."
Clarence Thomas (Probably) "We only meant that for Republican presidents".
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
It should, generally, be hard to flat out lose in 5 years after such an enormous win, so governments should not run scared of every whiff of unpopularity around a tough decision or poor outcome, but obviously it is still possible to cock things up so impressively you still do manage to lose.
"Over two years, my friend. Let's say, one last dance, right? I don't know how I'm going to fill my dance card, now. How will I fill that void without you? ... Start some rumors in here, I guess."
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
Dunno, we’ve managed to keep the pile-on for the Tories going for about 5 years (plus some depending on your viewpoint).
..but they are as shite as reported....... You can't polish a turd.
Just a reminder it is just one week to Trump !!!!!!
Maybe there should be a thread on which potential executive order will provoke the most hysteria.
Joe Biden about to give a press conference live on Sky
"My fellow Americans, I have today instructed Seal Team 6 to take out Trump, his family, all his proposed politcal appointees. And anyone who donated to his political campaign.
Because the Supreme Court said I could."
Clarence Thomas (Probably) "We only meant that for Republican presidents".
Biden: I'm 102, what are you gonna do - put me in a prison rather than a care home?
British expats will be forced to pay 100pc tax on their holiday home in Spain under new measures to fix the country’s housing crisis.
Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, announced 12 reforms amid an ongoing row over the impact of foreigners on local house prices.
This includes the introduction of a tax for those from outside the European Union (EU) who do not currently live in Spain.
Proposals from the Spanish government suggest this levy could be as high as 100pc of the value of the home, much higher than current rates. Real estate purchases in Spain are currently subject to 10pc tax on newly-built homes and 6pc on old properties.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
Would Rishi have really made us 'Trump-proof'?
Rishi wouldn't have: (a) paid to surrender British territory to a foreign power in hock to China (b) not committed to Reparations (c) not asked the Unions to name their price and (d) not sent Tory party staffers to campaign for the Democrats.
So, for political and economic resilience: yeah, it certainly would have helped.
On d), if Rishi had sent Tory staffers to campaign for the Democrats alongside Labour then maybe Harris would have waltzed home. But I believe Tories usually campaign for the Republicans.
Tories, like Robert Buckland, campaigned for Harris as individuals not party representatives.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
The LDs are busy and effective in about 100 seats and invisible in the rest. It restricts their ambition to only be a junior partner in a coalition. They need national visibility and for that they need a vivid and gripping and easily explained cause that has wide popularity. Like Iraq.
I'd start by a loud and visible national campaign to accept the EU's offer of freedom of movement for the under 30s. Put it on TikTok. Then move onto joining the customs union/common market. It's an empty space at the moment.
British expats will be forced to pay 100pc tax on their holiday home in Spain under new measures to fix the country’s housing crisis.
Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, announced 12 reforms amid an ongoing row over the impact of foreigners on local house prices.
This includes the introduction of a tax for those from outside the European Union (EU) who do not currently live in Spain.
Proposals from the Spanish government suggest this levy could be as high as 100pc of the value of the home, much higher than current rates. Real estate purchases in Spain are currently subject to 10pc tax on newly-built homes and 6pc on old properties.
100pc of the value of the home. This is on purchase presumably ?
Presumably this won’t be timeshares.
Spain has a major housing crisis in many of the places Brits want to live and this is literally the only policy they can implement that isn't build more houses that looks like they are doing something.
So it's going to upset a few Brits who are trying to buy, but probably won't have real impact beyond that. But something will have been done which ticks a small checkbox and possibly wins a few votes in an election if you time the election right..
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
I'm currently reading Iain Dale's new book, 'The Dictators'. So far it's been very interesting, especially with the characters I have not, or only barely, heard of before.
But some of the things said in the book seem very pertinent to contemporary western politics. It might even be worth a threader or two...
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
The LDs are busy and effective in about 100 seats and invisible in the rest. It restricts their ambition to only be a junior partner in a coalition. They need national visibility and for that they need a vivid and gripping and easily explained cause that has wide popularity. Like Iraq.
I'd start by a loud and visible national campaign to accept the EU's offer of freedom of movement for the under 30s. Put it on TikTok. Then move onto joining the customs union/common market. It's an empty space at the moment.
On the other hand Davey is the only Party leader with a net positive score from the public.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
I can still understand some of the reasons people like him (if not the fervour by which they do), I thought he was most likely to win the election so it's not like I allow my hatred of him to ignore that he is not hated by everyone, but it's the little things like the absurd personal vanity, the rudeness, that are offputting even aside from any political considerations.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
It should, generally, be hard to flat out lose in 5 years after such an enormous win, so governments should not run scared of every whiff of unpopularity around a tough decision or poor outcome, but obviously it is still possible to cock things up so impressively you still do manage to lose.
2024 was a very wide (lots of seats) but very shallow win. So it won't take many votes voting efficiently for the closest contender for the next election to make Labour 2029 look like the Tories in 2024...
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
I'm currently reading Iain Dale's new book, 'The Dictators'. So far it's been very interesting, especially with the characters I have not, or only barely, heard of before.
But some of the things said in the book seem very pertinent to contemporary western politics. It might even be worth a threader or two...
I'm sure our exhausted hosts are looking for some good headers. Go for it!!
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
The 2019 parliament demonstrates that very clearly.
Though whether the Tories have someone as capable as SKS to reverse their bloodbath is far from clear.
At the moment if Labour doesn't succeed it looks like voters will elect a very hung parliament, neither turning for the Tories or any other party for a majority government. Though the LDs or Reform may end up Kingmakers in a hung parliament
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
I can still understand some of the reasons people like him (if not the fervour by which they do), I thought he was most likely to win the election so it's not like I allow my hatred of him to ignore that he is not hated by everyone, but it's the little things like the absurd personal vanity, the rudeness, that are offputting even aside from any political considerations.
I think Trump goes down particularly badly with Britons. He lacks grace, manners, charm, consistency, eloquence, intellect, modesty, dignity. That doesn't seem to be a problem though in MAGA-land.
Bill Clinton understood the importance of delivery. While he was president, he was taking lessons from a drama coach from one of the Ivy League schools. The coach came down to the White House once a month, as I recall.
Was she cute?
The cute one went down while the President came, not 'came down to the White House.'
Andrew Neil @afneil · 1h Yield on UK 10-year bonds getting v close to 4.9% while sterling now close to $1.21. Watch this space!
What's funny is that this may derail Chagos. They were rumoured to be planning to try to announce the deal this week, but can the major political intervention of this week really be that the Government is writing a £9bn cheque?? It would be stark staring bonkers.
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
The LDs are busy and effective in about 100 seats and invisible in the rest. It restricts their ambition to only be a junior partner in a coalition. They need national visibility and for that they need a vivid and gripping and easily explained cause that has wide popularity. Like Iraq.
I'd start by a loud and visible national campaign to accept the EU's offer of freedom of movement for the under 30s. Put it on TikTok. Then move onto joining the customs union/common market. It's an empty space at the moment.
On the other hand Davey is the only Party leader with a net positive score from the public.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
I'm currently reading Iain Dale's new book, 'The Dictators'. So far it's been very interesting, especially with the characters I have not, or only barely, heard of before.
But some of the things said in the book seem very pertinent to contemporary western politics. It might even be worth a threader or two...
I'm sure our exhausted hosts are looking for some good headers. Go for it!!
I've got to finish the book first! I'm taking notes as I go, but it's a case of whether the themes I'm seeing carry on, or if I think they have novel meaning.
It's quite a nice book, with 64 people writing about 64 dictators (historic and current), all with a slightly different, but mainly consistent, style.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
Would Rishi have really made us 'Trump-proof'?
Rishi wouldn't have: (a) paid to surrender British territory to a foreign power in hock to China (b) not committed to Reparations (c) not asked the Unions to name their price and (d) not sent Tory party staffers to campaign for the Democrats.
So, for political and economic resilience: yeah, it certainly would have helped.
On d), if Rishi had sent Tory staffers to campaign for the Democrats alongside Labour then maybe Harris would have waltzed home. But I believe Tories usually campaign for the Republicans.
The Tories haven't really had strong links to the Republicans, certainly at presidential election level, since Hague and George W Bush in 2000 or McCain and Cameron in 2008.
Farage is closer to Trump than Kemi is, albeit she has met Vance
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
I can still understand some of the reasons people like him (if not the fervour by which they do), I thought he was most likely to win the election so it's not like I allow my hatred of him to ignore that he is not hated by everyone, but it's the little things like the absurd personal vanity, the rudeness, that are offputting even aside from any political considerations.
I think Trump goes down particularly with Britons. He lacks grace, manners, charm, consistency, eloquence, intellect, modesty, dignity. That doesn't seem to be a problem though in MAGA-land.
And yet a huge chunk of Britons like Love Islanders, Influencers, footballers, and Paddy McGuiness so maybe the country isn’t big on grace, manners, charm, consistency, eloquence, intellect, modesty and dignity?
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
The 2019 parliament demonstrates that very clearly.
Though whether the Tories have someone as capable as SKS to reverse their bloodbath is far from clear.
Clue: it doesn't look like Badenoch.
At this stage of opposition Capability Keir was somewhere between pointing at wallpaper and christening The Johnson Variant
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
I can't see any Reform voters being that bothered. They aren't ideological socialists - I'd think they'd be largely glad of the extra NHS capacity if other people opted out.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
You are right to point out that Trump is by far the biggest threat to the economy, but that's why a competent Chancellor, and PM, with a deliverable plan matters. Labour should have been preparing us for Trump 2.0 since the general election. Does anyone think that the UK has been Trump-proofed?
Trump is focused on China, the EU, Canada and Mexico first for his tariffs.
One benefit of Brexit is we are at the back of his tariffs queue
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
I'm currently reading Iain Dale's new book, 'The Dictators'. So far it's been very interesting, especially with the characters I have not, or only barely, heard of before.
But some of the things said in the book seem very pertinent to contemporary western politics. It might even be worth a threader or two...
"The normal estimate is that of a Paraguayan population of somewhere between 450,000 and 900,000, only 220,000 survived the war, of whom only 28,000 were adult males."
British expats will be forced to pay 100pc tax on their holiday home in Spain under new measures to fix the country’s housing crisis.
Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, announced 12 reforms amid an ongoing row over the impact of foreigners on local house prices.
This includes the introduction of a tax for those from outside the European Union (EU) who do not currently live in Spain.
Proposals from the Spanish government suggest this levy could be as high as 100pc of the value of the home, much higher than current rates. Real estate purchases in Spain are currently subject to 10pc tax on newly-built homes and 6pc on old properties.
100pc of the value of the home. This is on purchase presumably ?
Presumably this won’t be timeshares.
Spain has a major housing crisis in many of the places Brits want to live and this is literally the only policy they can implement that isn't build more houses that looks like they are doing something.
So it's going to upset a few Brits who are trying to buy, but probably won't have real impact beyond that. But something will have been done which ticks a small checkbox and possibly wins a few votes in an election if you time the election right..
Yeah, but not just places where Brits want to live. Also Airbnb in places like Barcelona driving up prices too as renters have been turfed out to convert to Airbnb
Barcelona had wanted to ban short term let’s but may not be able to. Due to EU law.
On topic, yes. Obviously, in fact, given that RefUK+Grn are currently 32%.
I'm excluding the Lib Dems from that group as they're both of fairly recent vintage as a governing party and also mainstream establishment. However, it's telling that the highest Con+Lab share this year in any poll is just 53%. As TSE noted in a thread the other day, there's a decent chance the next election ends up with no party near a majority and 4-6 blocks of quite sizeable numbers.
The fact that the LDs have barely shifted since the election, and any movement has actually been downwards is a very compelling fact about how they are seen by the electorate when they have started to despise both Lab and Con. The seeds of an epoch making change are around.
The one thing Greens and Reform have in common is their populism.
Well, the strength of the LDs will be tested in May, if the Tory county councils are brave enough to hold elections.
Nearly half have already cancelled them, with Mayoral elections not likely until 2026 and the first unitary elections until 2027
I listened to some of Starmer's AI speech as I drove to the pool today. Leaving aside the content, his delivery is awful. It might work in a court or meeting, but it just doesn't work when he has to deliver a message to the public, or sell a policy.
He should really have got this sorted years ago. Thatcher had voice coaching, as I recall.
I can't even listen to his shuttlecock caught in his Adam's apple voice.
As soon as he comes on I turn the radio off.
It’s funny how some voices grate.
I used to find Boris’s quite awful. All that waffle and wiffle. Really started to wind me up.
Sunak’s I liked. May, Cameron were fine. Truss sounded like she was a child reading the phone book slowly - very weird. Brown’s vocal timbre was quite reassuring and solid (I found what he said annoying). The one that changed for me was Blair. For a long time I didn’t mind his weird vocal mannerisms and then there reached a point where it drove me to utter apoplexy every time he started talking. Never minded Thatcher’s - though if you were an opponent I could see how it would annoy.
Starmer is definitely in the bottom tier.
I don't mind cracking open my ranking of PM's from most to least annoying voice again:
Thatcher Sunak Starmer Major Blair May Cameron Johnson Brown Truss
Yeah, Truss wins. Personal taste, innit. But I find the south eastern accent (i.e. mist of them) can be a little grating. Brown would win, but he was just so bloody gloomy.
People are becoming dissatisfied with the quality of politicians in Parliament, but Labour have a majority, so the solution is for Charles to fire Starmer and ask Tony Blair to form a government.
Not happening unless first Blair entered the Commons again or Lords and second most Labour MPs backed Blair as the new PM first and voted no confidence in Starmer as their leader. The King can only appoint as PM a party leader who has a majority of MPs behind them
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
The 2019 parliament demonstrates that very clearly.
Though whether the Tories have someone as capable as SKS to reverse their bloodbath is far from clear.
At the moment if Labour doesn't succeed it looks like voters will elect a very hung parliament, neither turning for the Tories or any other party for a majority government. Though the LDs or Reform may end up Kingmakers in a hung parliament
The Tories are very weak and discredited, Labour is accident prone and timid, Reform are repellent to much of the electorate and as much in danger of falling to pieces as any other radical party, and the Lib Dems have done a great job of nailing down bases of strength but appear to have only modest room for further expansion.
Where this is all going to end up is anyone's guess, though the possibility of nobody coming close to a majority and no stable coalition being available shouldn't be discounted. We shouldn't necessarily assume that the Liberal Democrats will be willing to prop up Labour after their previous experience as a junior partner, nor that Labour would concede the likely demand - PR, without a referendum - as the price of their support.
I'm sceptical that the rump Tories and Reform are going to become popular enough to be able to assemble a majority between them, though I stand to be corrected by the course of events.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
The 2019 parliament demonstrates that very clearly.
Though whether the Tories have someone as capable as SKS to reverse their bloodbath is far from clear.
Clue: it doesn't look like Badenoch.
"Capable".
Chortle.
Capable of turning around a record electoral defeat?
Yep, he did that.
He looked a dead duck in his first year as LOTO, so very unwise and complacent to count him out now.
After meeting President Trump in Mar-a-Lago, Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says Canada should prepare for 25% tariffs starting on Jan 20 on all US-bound products, ***including on crude oil***.
"I'm not expecting any exemptions," she told reporters
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the West.
... and on his own consumers. And many American business that depend on imports from Canada.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron. Makes Reeves look almost competent. Almost.
I find it impossible to be objective about the man, he is so odious in personality, manner, and even his smug grin just infuriates me. So I find it hard to indulge in any analysis of him.
Yet millions seem to worship him.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
I can still understand some of the reasons people like him (if not the fervour by which they do), I thought he was most likely to win the election so it's not like I allow my hatred of him to ignore that he is not hated by everyone, but it's the little things like the absurd personal vanity, the rudeness, that are offputting even aside from any political considerations.
I think Trump goes down particularly with Britons. He lacks grace, manners, charm, consistency, eloquence, intellect, modesty, dignity. That doesn't seem to be a problem though in MAGA-land.
And yet a huge chunk of Britons like Love Islanders, Influencers, footballers, and Paddy McGuiness so maybe the country isn’t big on grace, manners, charm, consistency, eloquence, intellect, modesty and dignity?
We're not inherently classier, but I think we've yet to engage with the kind of in your face boastfulness that americans seem to like in their politicians (they also love their enormous political rallies). People sometimes try to be disruptive, but I don't think it has caught on, even most Reform politicians are pretty traditional. I think we still have an image in our heads of what politicians sound like, for the most part.
What we like in terms of entertainment is another matter.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
The 2019 parliament demonstrates that very clearly.
Though whether the Tories have someone as capable as SKS to reverse their bloodbath is far from clear.
Clue: it doesn't look like Badenoch.
At this stage of opposition Capability Keir was somewhere between pointing at wallpaper and christening The Johnson Variant
Yep, and delivered the worst defeat of the Tories in 2 centuries.
At the moment if Labour doesn't succeed it looks like voters will elect a very hung parliament, neither turning for the Tories or any other party for a majority government. Though the LDs or Reform may end up Kingmakers in a hung parliament
Tory redemption could take a while. I suspect it is very much reliant on a Reform implosion, which on the balance of probabilities is highly likely.
A magnificent pile-on on Starmer and Reeves on PB today. Still, they can console themselves with the thought that they've got four years to convince the PB cognoscenti that they're not as shit as reported in January 2025. Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
I think it's complacent in the extreme to think that just because you win a landslide in one GE that public opinion is essentially irrelevant and you can do whatever you like for a full 5 years, and with little consequence.
Politics doesn't work like that.
The 2019 parliament demonstrates that very clearly.
Though whether the Tories have someone as capable as SKS to reverse their bloodbath is far from clear.
Clue: it doesn't look like Badenoch.
At this stage of opposition Capability Keir was somewhere between pointing at wallpaper and christening The Johnson Variant
Yep, and delivered the worst defeat of the Tories in 2 centuries.
Comments
But we can see that the tide has gone out, in multiple ways, on the economy she benefited from (building capital goods for a growing Chinese economy and diesel cars for Europe, using cheap Russian gas).
Which is to say that, even in the unlikely event that you hit upon a combination of policies that work in the short term, the world keeps on changing, and countries and leaders have to keep on changing to keep up. Which is why it's important that we retain the ability to kick out our leaders and to criticise them really quite harshly.
Whether PB can maintain the pile-on for another four years is a different matter. It could become tedious.
She invented a £20 bn hole to give herself cover to ram up taxes and pay her mates in the public sector.
That now counts against as her statements cannot be taken at face value
1) Davey needs to come out more strongly against Labour now. They are the government, the Lib Dems are an opposition force, stop the mood music around broadly welcoming their aims and be a bit more punchy about the fact they’re failing.
2) Come up with some interesting policies. Expose the Tories for a lack of certainty/vision. Dont just pledge to reverse everything Labour do but claim you can still have the benefit. Have some eye-catching stuff. You can work out the full details later, the key thing is getting a policy out there. Don’t get drawn on costings. Going with the structural reform stuff would be a great angle IMHO - doing the things the other parties won’t do.
The harder issue is will you PB lefties be able to go the distance justifying the unjustifiable.
Adults in the room LOL
They are not up against a Reform challenge in any significant region, and where they hold seats in areas of Green strength it’s the rural NIMBY version of the greens rather than the Gaza BJO version.
As soon as he comes on I turn the radio off.
And there isn't.
Perhaps they are missing the strong and stable halcyon days of that glorious summer and autumn of 2022.
I did warn you.
I used to find Boris’s quite awful. All that waffle and wiffle. Really started to wind me up.
Sunak’s I liked. May, Cameron were fine. Truss sounded like she was a child reading the phone book slowly - very weird. Brown’s vocal timbre was quite reassuring and solid (I found what he said annoying). The one that changed for me was Blair. For a long time I didn’t mind his weird vocal mannerisms and then there reached a point where it drove me to utter apoplexy every time he started talking. Never minded Thatcher’s - though if you were an opponent I could see how it would annoy.
Starmer is definitely in the bottom tier.
Furthermore adopt Dilnot now
No doubt there are other ideas, but Reeves fundamentally handed money to the public sector before she had achieved the growth to pay for it
British expats will be forced to pay 100pc tax on their holiday home in Spain under new measures to fix the country’s housing crisis.
Spanish prime minister, Pedro Sánchez, announced 12 reforms amid an ongoing row over the impact of foreigners on local house prices.
This includes the introduction of a tax for those from outside the European Union (EU) who do not currently live in Spain.
Proposals from the Spanish government suggest this levy could be as high as 100pc of the value of the home, much higher than current rates. Real estate purchases in Spain are currently subject to 10pc tax on newly-built homes and 6pc on old properties.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/property/spain-plots-100pc-property-tax/
Politics doesn't work like that.
So, for political and economic resilience: yeah, it certainly would have helped.
Because the Supreme Court said I could."
But I believe Tories usually campaign for the Republicans.
What an embarassing, dangerous moron.
Almost makes Reeves look competent.
Actually, no he doesn't.
It's a concern for those in the top positions, but you can easily get to the top without being good at it. And in fairness the handful of more compelling speakers are far from guaranteed to be decent in other respects, so there's not a great deal of incentive to be good at it.
@afneil
·
1h
Yield on UK 10-year bonds getting v close to 4.9% while sterling now close to $1.21. Watch this space!
Howard Mortman
@HowardMortman
·
55m
"Over two years, my friend. Let's say, one last dance, right? I don't know how I'm going to fill my dance card, now. How will I fill that void without you? ... Start some rumors in here, I guess."
-- Karine Jean-Pierre to Peter Doocy
https://x.com/HowardMortman/status/1878870047432880574
Whilst PB witters on about the Chancellor, Trump declares economic war on the
..but they are as shite as reported....... You can't polish a turd.
Presumably this won’t be timeshares.
I guess it was the same with Hitler. Those who did not fall under the spell could not understand those who did.
Indeed, probabaly the same for all these cult figures through the ages.
They need national visibility and for that they need a vivid and gripping and easily explained cause that has wide popularity. Like Iraq.
I'd start by a loud and visible national campaign to accept the EU's offer of freedom of movement for the under 30s. Put it on TikTok.
Then move onto joining the customs union/common market. It's an empty space at the moment.
So it's going to upset a few Brits who are trying to buy, but probably won't have real impact beyond that. But something will have been done which ticks a small checkbox and possibly wins a few votes in an election if you time the election right..
But some of the things said in the book seem very pertinent to contemporary western politics. It might even be worth a threader or two...
https://bsky.app/profile/markpackuk.bsky.social/post/3lfilruinh22t
Though whether the Tories have someone as capable as SKS to reverse their bloodbath is far from clear.
Clue: it doesn't look like Badenoch.
Talk
@TalkTV
·
2h
Reform UK MP Rupert Lowe on whether his party would ask the British people to pay for medical care when in government.
"We should be allowed to opt out of the NHS and have some form of, you know, scheme where we buy our own healthcare."
@RupertLowe10
It's quite a nice book, with 64 people writing about 64 dictators (historic and current), all with a slightly different, but mainly consistent, style.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Ernest_Boulanger
Farage is closer to Trump than Kemi is, albeit she has met Vance
Started on the left, ended up a full blown Fascist and the puppet of a foreign dictator.
And did a dodgy deal with a Hoare on the way that caused him a lot of trouble.
One benefit of Brexit is we are at the back of his tariffs queue
"The normal estimate is that of a Paraguayan population of somewhere between 450,000 and 900,000, only 220,000 survived the war, of whom only 28,000 were adult males."
Yeah, but not just places where Brits want to live. Also Airbnb in places like Barcelona driving up prices too as renters have been turfed out to convert to Airbnb
Barcelona had wanted to ban short term let’s but may not be able to. Due to EU law.
Thatcher
Sunak
Starmer
Major
Blair
May
Cameron
Johnson
Brown
Truss
Yeah, Truss wins. Personal taste, innit. But I find the south eastern accent (i.e. mist of them) can be a little grating.
Brown would win, but he was just so bloody gloomy.
Chortle.
Then, when his deranged tariff programme causes prices to skyrocket, he'll blame Biden for bequeathing high inflation.
Where this is all going to end up is anyone's guess, though the possibility of nobody coming close to a majority and no stable coalition being available shouldn't be discounted. We shouldn't necessarily assume that the Liberal Democrats will be willing to prop up Labour after their previous experience as a junior partner, nor that Labour would concede the likely demand - PR, without a referendum - as the price of their support.
I'm sceptical that the rump Tories and Reform are going to become popular enough to be able to assemble a majority between them, though I stand to be corrected by the course of events.
Yep, he did that.
He looked a dead duck in his first year as LOTO, so very unwise and complacent to count him out now.
What we like in terms of entertainment is another matter.
That's pretty damned capable as LOTO.