Books on American history: Three classics that I have enjoyed: "Only Yesterday" by Frederick Lewis Allen "Roosevelt: The Lion and the Fox" by James MacGregor Burns (I have not gotten around to reading the "Soldier of Freedom" sequel, but plan to.) "Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision" by Roberta Wohlstetter
In return, can any of you refer me to a good biography of John Bright? (If there isn't one, there should be.)
I mean if I was a black bloke I would very much not like to walk past a statue of a racist slaver (are there any other kind) on my way to Starbucks each day. As a white bloke I don't like it either. We have all moved on get the statues down.
Churchill did more good than harm and there is a difference between having an unsavoury view of something and working to institute that view as a form of government.
I haven't. Statues are put there to commemorate historically significant people and events, not to give you the warm fuzzies as you go and get your coffee.
After signing away British territory and paying for the privilege, Starmer’s next wheeze is to give IRA members taxpayer funded compensation. Based on another non-binding decision of a court, no doubt.
I mean if I was a black bloke I would very much not like to walk past a statue of a racist slaver (are there any other kind) on my way to Starbucks each day. As a white bloke I don't like it either. We have all moved on get the statues down.
Churchill did more good than harm and there is a difference between having an unsavoury view of something and working to institute that view as a form of government.
We have to suffer Butcher cumberland and other associated fcukwits, how do you think we northern slaves feel
I mean if I was a black bloke I would very much not like to walk past a statue of a racist slaver (are there any other kind) on my way to Starbucks each day. As a white bloke I don't like it either. We have all moved on get the statues down.
Churchill did more good than harm and there is a difference between having an unsavoury view of something and working to institute that view as a form of government.
We have to suffer Butcher cumberland and other associated fcukwits, how do you think we northern slaves feel
Books on American history: Three classics that I have enjoyed: "Only Yesterday" by Frederick Lewis Allen "Roosevelt: The Lion and the Fox" by James MacGregor Burns (I have not gotten around to reading the "Soldier of Freedom" sequel, but plan to.) "Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision" by Roberta Wohlstetter
In return, can any of you refer me to a good biography of John Bright? (If there isn't one, there should be.)
Can't help with John Bright but have you read The Cousins' Wars by Kevin Phillips? He traces the American revolution and the Civil War back to the ancient struggle on these shores between Anglo-Saxons (who migrated to New England) and Celts (the South).
Forgive an off-topic post this late, but tomorrow my best friend is going in for heart surgery. And this song has kept coming to mind. I'm sure it's something the medic's have done 1000 times and it'll all be fine, but... you know. The fretting.
That would resolve one of several mysteries about the deal with Mauritius if so. Why is Starmer so anxious to get a deal over the line before the a Trump presidency starts? UK governments always do what the US tells them on Diego Garcia.
This feels like either they've got cold feet and want to use Trump's veto as an excuse to say to Mauritius "sorry, don't blame us" - or they've had signals that Trump will allow it.
One of the other mysteries is why Trump would object to the UK doing a deal with Mauritius, if he does really object to it. Either he would want the deal because it secures the base legally for the next 99 years, which is why the US has pushed hard on UK governments of different stripes to seal it. Or he might be indifferent whether there's a deal or not, just as Trump is indifferent to the law and contracts generally.
How should we read the noises now coming out of the FCO about the Chagos deal?
Is it, in fact, over? Was it Starmer’s secret intention all along, to pull out of it citing US disapproval?
It’s annoying to me how murky it’s been.
There is a democratic deficit with this deal, due to the US. How are we to judge it if we don't know how much rent the US pays us? If the deal is revenue neutral it's rather different from us paying $90m a year for nothing. How is parliament to properly judge?
Divine Right was more of an early modern, than a medieval, idea.
Medieval Parliaments quite often rejected royal requests for taxation, and vigorously criticised the King’s ministers.
I’d argue that kings like Edward III, Henry IV, Henry V, were constitutional monarchs.
The sheer number of rebellions against and even executions of medieval monarchs argues against the idea the power brokers of the time had a serious belief in divine right.
Imagining a more convenient past constitutional settlement was a tactic of both sides centuries later of course.
You couldn't get rid of the ruler of the day without an execution - if you believe in Divine Right and the hereditary principle the only way you can deliver regime change is through death.
I'm not sure it's much of a sincere belief in the former if you kill them to them to ignore the latter (or come up with convenient reasons why it does not apply)
You simply know God is on your side.
Changes His mind a lot, sadly.
Youguv rarely polls in Heaven…..
9 out of 10 angels support absolute autocracy and monarchy, after all that is the regime in heaven.
The other 1 is Satan, who has a good working relationship with the big guy, with them doing a bit of punting on poor old Job.
Satan is basically a libertarian taken to extremis.
Going well, isn’t it? Now the adults are in charge again
I just don't want people getting overexcited. You need to keep your wits about you when doing political punditry.
Just admit this is now a total shit show, and far worse than you envisaged, and we’re all good
Tulip is disappointing yes. Other than that, no not really. I'm a deep realist on growth, remember. I keep posting about it.
Anyway you agree about Reeves, don't you. She's safe as houses in her position. If you think otherwise there could be a bet to be had.
This resignation has absolutely no effect on Reeves, who will stand or fall depending on her actions and the market reactions over the coming months and of course her own backbenchers responses to her bringing back austerity
Yes, but the scent of blood is in the water and the sharks are circling.
2 ministers lost in 6 months who's next ?
And actually I wonder about Reeves
The recent photos of her show her looking haggard and deeply stressed. And very out of her depth
I wonder if she might resign on some pretext? I can’t see Starmer dumping her as sacking or losing a COTE is usually terminal, in the end, for a PM
Regardless I’d say the chances of her departing Number 11 have gone from minuscule to small but non trivial
The next one to go will probably be for something unexpected.
SKS has lost one minister on a theft accusation and the next on a link to corruption. Pick your crime.
Who was the theft one? I thought Tulip was the first.
So - without wanting to miss the story - what did Louise Haigh do? The story appears to be "reported a phone stolen - found it wasn't stolen." For which she pleaded guilty to fraud. Is the inference that there is more to this story? The facts as they are reported feel like they are missing some details to make it make sense.
From the stories at the time it appeared her employer realised the lost phones were still in possession with Ms Haigh.
So was it her employer who pressed charges? The gap between her explanation - "it was an honest mistake" - and what I think we're supposed to read into this ( she reported a phone as stolen which wasn't? - there was no robbery in the first place? Multiple phones? ) seems very large indeed. And the sentence appears to indicate the legal system regarded it as more than an honest mistake. But maybe that is just how the legal system works.
I remember thinking at the time there was surely more to come out, and then I forgot all about it.
Louise Haigh pleaded guilty to lying that phone was stolen, paper shows
Exclusive: Document sheds new light on episode that led to minister’s exit and guilty plea that friends say she regrets
So the theft was made up? If that's true, that's a far bigger story than was painted at the time. Slightly surprising she's still an MP, tbh. I suppose you do your time and move on - but are there any other convicted criminals in parliament?
The Reform bloke who kicked his girlfriend. Talk of bringing in a law to stop people like him being allowed to be an MP. Feels dodgy to select on type of crime.
His conviction is spent, he hasn't broken the law since he was elected, leave it to the voters. I suspect given current polls he will hold Basildon for Reform comfortably next time regardless.
43% of MPs have criminal records apparently, he is not unusual, even if most didn't get a prison sentence like he did.
A criminal record should be a disbarment IMO. Old fashioned perhaps. Clearly Reform isn't that old fashioned after all
No it should not at all. Either you believe in rehabilitation or your don't, if your conviction is spent let the voters decide.
Plenty of able politicians have had criminal records, George W Bush for drink driving, Ted Kennedy after his car crash killed his passenger, Julian Brazier after he collided with a motorcyclist on the wrong side of the road and killed him, even Sunak, Boris and Starmer breached some of the Covid rules and there are certain rumours about a Magistrates Court Appearance for a certain former New Labour PM in his youthful days of exuberance which he was convicted for on his middle name but shan't go into that too much for obvious reasons
I thought that although some people claimed Starmer had breached Covid regulations the Police decided her hadn’t.
Well he should have been in my view even if he wasn't
You probably think Boris Johnson was hard done by over the Covid prosecutions, whereas I think he was let off far too easily, as well.
Boris was sitting having a drinl outside after work in a garden and briefly received a cake in his office. Starmer had a beer and curry with Labour workers. Spot the difference?
Starmer was at work and Johnson wasn't, so one was legal and the other not?
But Boris was at work, ambushed by a cake. Whereas Starmer was on the piss. And that must be true, I read it on politicalbetting.com .
Forgive an off-topic post this late, but tomorrow my best friend is going in for heart surgery. And this song has kept coming to mind. I'm sure it's something the medic's have done 1000 times and it'll all be fine, but... you know. The fretting.
That would resolve one of several mysteries about the deal with Mauritius if so. Why is Starmer so anxious to get a deal over the line before the a Trump presidency starts? UK governments always do what the US tells them on Diego Garcia.
This feels like either they've got cold feet and want to use Trump's veto as an excuse to say to Mauritius "sorry, don't blame us" - or they've had signals that Trump will allow it.
One of the other mysteries is why Trump would object to the UK doing a deal with Mauritius, if he does really object to it. Either he would want the deal because it secures the base legally for the next 99 years, which is why the US has pushed hard on UK governments of different stripes to seal it. Or he might be indifferent whether there's a deal or not, just as Trump is indifferent to the law and contracts generally.
It's secure legally now. The UK just has to say no to Mauritius.
Forgive an off-topic post this late, but tomorrow my best friend is going in for heart surgery. And this song has kept coming to mind. I'm sure it's something the medic's have done 1000 times and it'll all be fine, but... you know. The fretting.
Interesting poll. Didn't expect Ref to be ahead of the Tories in Scotland.
It is well within MoE. You can't put a cigarette paper between them, which I would have thought after all the Farage/Musk/Trump ramping in the Reform press corps. would be disappointing for them.
Interesting poll. Didn't expect Ref to be ahead of the Tories in Scotland.
It is well within MoE. You can't put a cigarette paper between them, which I would have thought after all the Farage/Musk/Trump ramping in the Reform press corps. would be disappointing for them.
UKIP used to be pretty unpopular in Scotland at the same time as having significant support in England and Wales, so that is a change.
Divine Right was more of an early modern, than a medieval, idea.
Medieval Parliaments quite often rejected royal requests for taxation, and vigorously criticised the King’s ministers.
I’d argue that kings like Edward III, Henry IV, Henry V, were constitutional monarchs.
Well, their power was certainly constrained rather than absolute. They had very few rights to impose taxation (Ship Money, for example, was typically granted by parliament at the beginning of a Monarch's reign) beyond a very narrow scope. This meant they needed to negotiate in order to get money to pursue their goals.
On the other hand, day to day executive power existed almost entirely with the Crown, and so long as there was no pressing need for additional revenues, long periods could go by without Parliament being called.
Kings are pretty good at spending money, so once they got into the habit of calling Parliaments it'd be interesting to know what the longest gap was until Charles I.
Before the reign of Charles I, the longest gap between parliaments in the UK occurred during the reign of Edward III, between 1327 and 1337. This ten-year period, often called the "Parliamentary Silence," is notable for the lack of parliamentary sessions due to Edward III's consolidation of power and financial independence through royal revenues and other means.
This long interval ended when Edward III called parliament in 1337 to secure funding for his military campaigns in France, marking the beginning of the Hundred Years' War. The gap highlights how medieval monarchs could rule without parliamentary consent when they were financially self-sufficient or politically strong.
Shouldn't that say 'England' rather than 'the UK?' That didn't exist until 1801 when the rules were rather different.
Few Englanders know the difference
Course we do. We have South England, North England, West England, and the other one, the four constituent parts of the UK.
How should we read the noises now coming out of the FCO about the Chagos deal?
Is it, in fact, over? Was it Starmer’s secret intention all along, to pull out of it citing US disapproval?
It’s annoying to me how murky it’s been.
I expect these things to be murky for most of it, but even with an expected chorus of opposition criticism, they haven't done a very good job of explaining the benefits to the UK, other than vague talk of securing the long term future, which may well be so but has kind of been missed in the suggestion they've tried to get it done before Trump.
Divine Right was more of an early modern, than a medieval, idea.
Medieval Parliaments quite often rejected royal requests for taxation, and vigorously criticised the King’s ministers.
I’d argue that kings like Edward III, Henry IV, Henry V, were constitutional monarchs.
The sheer number of rebellions against and even executions of medieval monarchs argues against the idea the power brokers of the time had a serious belief in divine right.
Imagining a more convenient past constitutional settlement was a tactic of both sides centuries later of course.
You couldn't get rid of the ruler of the day without an execution - if you believe in Divine Right and the hereditary principle the only way you can deliver regime change is through death.
I'm not sure it's much of a sincere belief in the former if you kill them to them to ignore the latter (or come up with convenient reasons why it does not apply)
You simply know God is on your side.
Changes His mind a lot, sadly.
Youguv rarely polls in Heaven…..
9 out of 10 angels support absolute autocracy and monarchy, after all that is the regime in heaven.
The other 1 is Satan, who has a good working relationship with the big guy, with them doing a bit of punting on poor old Job.
Satan is basically a libertarian taken to extremis.
Satan is a monarchist. He just wants to be the monarch.
“Better to reign in Hell, than to serve in Heaven”
I mean if I was a black bloke I would very much not like to walk past a statue of a racist slaver (are there any other kind) on my way to Starbucks each day. As a white bloke I don't like it either. We have all moved on get the statues down.
Churchill did more good than harm and there is a difference between having an unsavoury view of something and working to institute that view as a form of government.
I haven't. Statues are put there to commemorate historically significant people and events, not to give you the warm fuzzies as you go and get your coffee.
So where do I find the statue of Hitler.
Topping , why you being a silly billy
We'll, Hitler was certainly "historically significant" as you put it
Divine Right was more of an early modern, than a medieval, idea.
Medieval Parliaments quite often rejected royal requests for taxation, and vigorously criticised the King’s ministers.
I’d argue that kings like Edward III, Henry IV, Henry V, were constitutional monarchs.
The sheer number of rebellions against and even executions of medieval monarchs argues against the idea the power brokers of the time had a serious belief in divine right.
Imagining a more convenient past constitutional settlement was a tactic of both sides centuries later of course.
You couldn't get rid of the ruler of the day without an execution - if you believe in Divine Right and the hereditary principle the only way you can deliver regime change is through death.
I'm not sure it's much of a sincere belief in the former if you kill them to them to ignore the latter (or come up with convenient reasons why it does not apply)
You simply know God is on your side.
Changes His mind a lot, sadly.
Youguv rarely polls in Heaven…..
9 out of 10 angels support absolute autocracy and monarchy, after all that is the regime in heaven.
The other 1 is Satan, who has a good working relationship with the big guy, with them doing a bit of punting on poor old Job.
Satan is basically a libertarian taken to extremis.
Satan is a monarchist. He just wants to be the monarch.
“Better to reign in Hell, than to serve in Heaven”
...that is actually a line of dialogue in a Star Trek episode 😃
Divine Right was more of an early modern, than a medieval, idea.
Medieval Parliaments quite often rejected royal requests for taxation, and vigorously criticised the King’s ministers.
I’d argue that kings like Edward III, Henry IV, Henry V, were constitutional monarchs.
The sheer number of rebellions against and even executions of medieval monarchs argues against the idea the power brokers of the time had a serious belief in divine right.
Imagining a more convenient past constitutional settlement was a tactic of both sides centuries later of course.
You couldn't get rid of the ruler of the day without an execution - if you believe in Divine Right and the hereditary principle the only way you can deliver regime change is through death.
I'm not sure it's much of a sincere belief in the former if you kill them to them to ignore the latter (or come up with convenient reasons why it does not apply)
You simply know God is on your side.
Changes His mind a lot, sadly.
Youguv rarely polls in Heaven…..
9 out of 10 angels support absolute autocracy and monarchy, after all that is the regime in heaven.
The other 1 is Satan, who has a good working relationship with the big guy, with them doing a bit of punting on poor old Job.
Satan is basically a libertarian taken to extremis.
Satan is a monarchist. He just wants to be the monarch.
“Better to reign in Hell, than to serve in Heaven”
...that is actually a line of dialogue in a Star Trek episode 😃
I had no idea about this policy that they've just reversed. Many times i've bought a drink I didn't really want just in order to sit down for a bit and/or use the conveniences.
"Starbucks says people using its coffee shops must buy something Coffee chain reverses policy introduced in North America in 2018 that lets anyone use its facilities"
I had no idea about this policy that they've just reversed. Many times i've bought a drink I didn't really want just in order to sit down for a bit and/or use the conveniences.
"Starbucks says people using its coffee shops must buy something Coffee chain reverses policy introduced in North America in 2018 that lets anyone use its facilities"
I had no idea about this policy that they've just reversed. Many times i've bought a drink I didn't really want just in order to sit down for a bit and/or use the conveniences.
"Starbucks says people using its coffee shops must buy something Coffee chain reverses policy introduced in North America in 2018 that lets anyone use its facilities"
Wetherspoons will give you a Soda Water for free. So you can have the drink and dispose of its consequences, all without charge.
I paid 89 pence for a tonic water in Wetherspoons Birmingham a few days ago. Made a joke with the person behind the bar about how nice it was that you could still buy something in a pub for less than a pound.
I had no idea about this policy that they've just reversed. Many times i've bought a drink I didn't really want just in order to sit down for a bit and/or use the conveniences.
"Starbucks says people using its coffee shops must buy something Coffee chain reverses policy introduced in North America in 2018 that lets anyone use its facilities"
Wetherspoons will give you a Soda Water for free. So you can have the drink and dispose of its consequences, all without charge.
I paid 89 pence for a tonic water in Wetherspoons Birmingham a few days ago. Made a joke with the person behind the bar about how nice it was that you could still buy something in a pub for less than a pound.
If we count halves, a half of Real Ale in my spoons is 99p on Tuesdays.
A new pamphlet from Mark Park and Jim Williams, about strategy for this Parliament:
What next for the Liberal Democrats?
Introduction As we write this, three important processes are underway in our party. The general election review, chaired by Tim Farron, is nearing its completion, while the party’s policy review, chaired by Ed Davey, is at an early stage. So too is the party’s next strategy process, to update our strategy for this new Parliament. All three are important, but this pamphlet is aimed primarily at contributing to the debate around the third. It is more about psephology and electoral strategy than about policy or detailed operational lessons from the election.
Ha, so it seems that a Russian ship might have taken out another undersea cable in the Baltic - except that it was the wrong one, and there’s now major internet outages across Russia as a result.
A new pamphlet from Mark Park and Jim Williams, about strategy for this Parliament:
What next for the Liberal Democrats?
Introduction As we write this, three important processes are underway in our party. The general election review, chaired by Tim Farron, is nearing its completion, while the party’s policy review, chaired by Ed Davey, is at an early stage. So too is the party’s next strategy process, to update our strategy for this new Parliament. All three are important, but this pamphlet is aimed primarily at contributing to the debate around the third. It is more about psephology and electoral strategy than about policy or detailed operational lessons from the election.
Yes - quite happy with this. Despite those huffing and puffing and hoping the Starmer edifice will fall - he might but that won’t mean the end of Labour as the majority Government party - it’s more likely we’re looking at a four and a half or even a five year Parliament. My current thinking is May 2029.
That means there’s time for the opposition parties to review, reflect and develop policies and communicate them for the next election when Labour will have to account for their record in Government which will be entertaining.
I’m expecting quite sober and boring offerings from both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats while Reform will try to promise everyone everything and will have to face scrutiny.
It may well be we are close to the high tide of modern populism and once that fails to deliver, there will be a shift back to a more consensual offering.
Suggestions this has been given the nod by the incoming Trump team. See how long Putin can refuse to play ball on Trump's "Ukraine deal within 24 hours"...
Suggestions this has been given the nod by the incoming Trump team. See how long Putin can refuse to play ball on Trump's "Ukraine deal within 24 hours"...
#RussiaIsCollapsing is trending on my Twitter this morning, alongside various economic stories showing debt rising and foreign currency reserves falling, both somewhat rapidly in the past few months. The escalation of the conflict into Russian airspace has also led to foreign airlines withdrawing Moscow and St.Petersberg flights.
Without being AEP and predicting 30 of the last two recessions, it does appear that the Russian economy could be close to a tipping point if the war doesn’t end soon.
Trump and Putin is going to be an interesting dynamic, both of them clearly see themselves as the big dog, the strong man in the room. I suspect that Trump is clearly showing Putin who’s actually the big dog in the room, and that there’s an effectively limitless arsenal of weapons that could be headed to Ukraine if he doesn’t at least come to the table.
Now Russia and Ukraine will be very far apart when it comes to how they think the war should end, but at least some talking would be a good start. Ukraine’s starting point will be a restoration of the 1991 border and NATO membership, Russia’s starting point will be a freeze on current lines (except for Kursk of course). I suspect that the landing zone is more along the post-2014 borders, but with Donbass and Crimea as independent states and Russian frozen assets paying for the rebuillding of Ukraine.
It’s encouraging to see a bi-partisan approach evolving on foreign policy between the outgoing Biden and incoming Trump administrations. It may not last of course but it’s a positive step.
To matters domestic and the resignation of Tulip Siddiq, for all it’s been handled with characteristic Starmer ruthlessness, was avoidable and is a needless distraction set against the serious issues such as the crisis in SEND provision which has again reached a fair way up the agenda.
As with adult social care, special education needs provision is a huge and growing drain on local authority finances and resources.
Interested to see Surrey County Council’s Conservative leader Tim Oliver asking the Government to write off District and Borough Council debt as part of devolution. In his patch he has Woking and Spelthorne who are between them £3 billion in debt and expecting future unitary authorities (or a County wide authority which would be Oliver’s choice I suspect) to inherit and manage that debt seems like an unnecessary millstone.
A new pamphlet from Mark Park and Jim Williams, about strategy for this Parliament:
What next for the Liberal Democrats?
Introduction As we write this, three important processes are underway in our party. The general election review, chaired by Tim Farron, is nearing its completion, while the party’s policy review, chaired by Ed Davey, is at an early stage. So too is the party’s next strategy process, to update our strategy for this new Parliament. All three are important, but this pamphlet is aimed primarily at contributing to the debate around the third. It is more about psephology and electoral strategy than about policy or detailed operational lessons from the election.
Yes - quite happy with this. Despite those huffing and puffing and hoping the Starmer edifice will fall - he might but that won’t mean the end of Labour as the majority Government party - it’s more likely we’re looking at a four and a half or even a five year Parliament. My current thinking is May 2029.
That means there’s time for the opposition parties to review, reflect and develop policies and communicate them for the next election when Labour will have to account for their record in Government which will be entertaining.
I’m expecting quite sober and boring offerings from both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats while Reform will try to promise everyone everything and will have to face scrutiny.
It may well be we are close to the high tide of modern populism and once that fails to deliver, there will be a shift back to a more consensual offering.
I've asked Dr Pack about their plans for Ashfield should the Ashfield Independents (who used to be Lib Dems up until 2015) go down, as a result of Z's Crown Court trial.
It’s encouraging to see a bi-partisan approach evolving on foreign policy between the outgoing Biden and incoming Trump administrations. It may not last of course but it’s a positive step.
To matters domestic and the resignation of Tulip Siddiq, for all it’s been handled with characteristic Starmer ruthlessness, was avoidable and is a needless distraction set against the serious issues such as the crisis in SEND provision which has again reached a fair way up the agenda.
As with adult social care, special education needs provision is a huge and growing drain on local authority finances and resources.
Interested to see Surrey County Council’s Conservative leader Tim Oliver asking the Government to write off District and Borough Council debt as part of devolution. In his patch he has Woking and Spelthorne who are between them £3 billion in debt and expecting future unitary authorities (or a County wide authority which would be Oliver’s choice I suspect) to inherit and manage that debt seems like an unnecessary millstone.
I don't see nationalisation of local council debt, especially from somewhere are rich as Surrey, and especially when pressures on Government finances are what they are.
That would underline that local authorities are not responsible for the Councillors' actions - which is not a set of principles we need at a time of expected increased devolution.
Suggestions this has been given the nod by the incoming Trump team. See how long Putin can refuse to play ball on Trump's "Ukraine deal within 24 hours"...
#RussiaIsCollapsing is trending on my Twitter this morning, alongside various economic stories showing debt rising and foreign currency reserves falling, both somewhat rapidly in the past few months. The escalation of the conflict into Russian airspace has also led to foreign airlines withdrawing Moscow and St.Petersberg flights.
Without being AEP and predicting 30 of the last two recessions, it does appear that the Russian economy could be close to a tipping point if the war doesn’t end soon.
Trump and Putin is going to be an interesting dynamic, both of them clearly see themselves as the big dog, the strong man in the room. I suspect that Trump is clearly showing Putin who’s actually the big dog in the room, and that there’s an effectively limitless arsenal of weapons that could be headed to Ukraine if he doesn’t at least come to the table.
Now Russia and Ukraine will be very far apart when it comes to how they think the war should end, but at least some talking would be a good start. Ukraine’s starting point will be a restoration of the 1991 border and NATO membership, Russia’s starting point will be a freeze on current lines (except for Kursk of course). I suspect that the landing zone is more along the post-2014 borders, but with Donbass and Crimea as independent states and Russian frozen assets paying for the rebuillding of Ukraine.
I don't see how Putin could possibly survive such a scenario. That would be 2014 borders, but with hundreds of thousands of dead Russians, and the country asset stripped.
It’s encouraging to see a bi-partisan approach evolving on foreign policy between the outgoing Biden and incoming Trump administrations. It may not last of course but it’s a positive step.
To matters domestic and the resignation of Tulip Siddiq, for all it’s been handled with characteristic Starmer ruthlessness, was avoidable and is a needless distraction set against the serious issues such as the crisis in SEND provision which has again reached a fair way up the agenda.
As with adult social care, special education needs provision is a huge and growing drain on local authority finances and resources.
Interested to see Surrey County Council’s Conservative leader Tim Oliver asking the Government to write off District and Borough Council debt as part of devolution. In his patch he has Woking and Spelthorne who are between them £3 billion in debt and expecting future unitary authorities (or a County wide authority which would be Oliver’s choice I suspect) to inherit and manage that debt seems like an unnecessary millstone.
I don't see nationalisation of local council debt, especially from somewhere are rich as Surrey, and especially when pressures on Government finances are what they are.
That would underline that local authorities are not responsible for the Councillors' actions - which is not a set of principles we need at a time of expected increased devolution.
The councillors who took the decisions which led to Woking plunging into the financial abyss have either resigned or been voted out while the senior officers who were also involved have also all left. To my knowledge none has faced criminal charges or surcharges but I suppose such measures could be entertained.
Suggestions this has been given the nod by the incoming Trump team. See how long Putin can refuse to play ball on Trump's "Ukraine deal within 24 hours"...
#RussiaIsCollapsing is trending on my Twitter this morning, alongside various economic stories showing debt rising and foreign currency reserves falling, both somewhat rapidly in the past few months. The escalation of the conflict into Russian airspace has also led to foreign airlines withdrawing Moscow and St.Petersberg flights.
Without being AEP and predicting 30 of the last two recessions, it does appear that the Russian economy could be close to a tipping point if the war doesn’t end soon.
Trump and Putin is going to be an interesting dynamic, both of them clearly see themselves as the big dog, the strong man in the room. I suspect that Trump is clearly showing Putin who’s actually the big dog in the room, and that there’s an effectively limitless arsenal of weapons that could be headed to Ukraine if he doesn’t at least come to the table.
Now Russia and Ukraine will be very far apart when it comes to how they think the war should end, but at least some talking would be a good start. Ukraine’s starting point will be a restoration of the 1991 border and NATO membership, Russia’s starting point will be a freeze on current lines (except for Kursk of course). I suspect that the landing zone is more along the post-2014 borders, but with Donbass and Crimea as independent states and Russian frozen assets paying for the rebuillding of Ukraine.
#RussiaIsCollapsing has been trending, on and off, for many months. Most of it is good morale-boosting stuff for pro-Ukrainians, but I don't take Twitter trends to actually mean much in the real world.
If they're "racist traitors", why were the bases named after them in the first place?
They are racist because they fought for the Confederacy (a country based and built on slavery) and they were traitors because they fought for the armed forces of another country against the properly constituted armed forces, government and constitution of the United States of America.
Yeah, I don't buy that.
If the rebellion had succeeded they be seen as secessionists or independence fighters, notwithstanding the slavery. Which I doubt would have lasted more than another 20 years anyway.
History is written by the victors.
In this case not. History got rewritten, for the best part of a century, to romanticise the traitors and racist losers.
The reason I labelled this nonsense MAGA DEI, is that they're wanting to rename military bases after notorious military incompetents - solely because they were Confederates.
Which I suppose is appropriate for Hesketh, who is obviously not qualified for the role.
Nah. DEI and Wokey take.
Lee was a great general and a pivotal figure in US history, who the Federals tried to recruit to lead their army.
He should absolutely have a statue.
Monroe, Franklin and Washington were far more iffy than Lee, who was essentially an honourable man loyal to his State - even if I didn't agree with his views.
If ever you want to see the descent into madness that anti-DEI and anti-wokery gets you, then this post is it.
Suggestions this has been given the nod by the incoming Trump team. See how long Putin can refuse to play ball on Trump's "Ukraine deal within 24 hours"...
#RussiaIsCollapsing is trending on my Twitter this morning, alongside various economic stories showing debt rising and foreign currency reserves falling, both somewhat rapidly in the past few months. The escalation of the conflict into Russian airspace has also led to foreign airlines withdrawing Moscow and St.Petersberg flights.
Without being AEP and predicting 30 of the last two recessions, it does appear that the Russian economy could be close to a tipping point if the war doesn’t end soon.
Trump and Putin is going to be an interesting dynamic, both of them clearly see themselves as the big dog, the strong man in the room. I suspect that Trump is clearly showing Putin who’s actually the big dog in the room, and that there’s an effectively limitless arsenal of weapons that could be headed to Ukraine if he doesn’t at least come to the table.
Now Russia and Ukraine will be very far apart when it comes to how they think the war should end, but at least some talking would be a good start. Ukraine’s starting point will be a restoration of the 1991 border and NATO membership, Russia’s starting point will be a freeze on current lines (except for Kursk of course). I suspect that the landing zone is more along the post-2014 borders, but with Donbass and Crimea as independent states and Russian frozen assets paying for the rebuillding of Ukraine.
I don't see how Putin could possibly survive such a scenario. That would be 2014 borders, but with hundreds of thousands of dead Russians, and the country asset stripped.
And that's one of my fears: Putin knows the only thing that can save him is a 'win'. And the deeper he gets into the war, the more Russians who die, and the deeper the Russian economic crisis gets, the bigger the 'win' has to be seen to be (and perception is a lot of it).
And the harder it becomes to get that 'win'. In fact, I reckon the only thing that will get him it is Trump. He cannot do it militarily without a heck of a lot of outside help; either directly or by withholding support to Ukraine.
Sad news about the passing of actor and comedian Tony Slattery, only 65 years old. Those of us who grew up in the ‘90s will remember him as part of the British version of the improv show “Whose Line Is It Anyway?” alongside Paul Merton.
Is that a full poll? Not as horrendous as I would have expected from Labour under the current circumstances, and with Ref and Con neck and neck.
It's a bit different to the subsample you posted last week.
Reform and Cons combined on 29% is higher for the right than even May and Davidson did in Scotland in 2014.
Slab back to 2015 levels and SNP still below 2015, 2017 and 2019 levels even if up a bit on 2024
Suella was adding Ref and Con together yesterday at 47%. She was explaining that she would be looking for a constituency by constituency quid pro quo between Ref and Con. Does that mean we should after all be combining Ref and Con?
If any one issue eventually sinks the government, I hope it's the Chagos deal.
Chagos is completely stupid and unnecessary but at the end of the day relatively trivial. I'd rather it was their staggering economic incompetence that destroys them myself.
That way there's at least a chance that the next government would lead to a more prosperous country, rather than yet more of the same failed Blairite consensus we've had this century.
Sad news about the passing of actor and comedian Tony Slattery, only 65 years old. Those of us who grew up in the ‘90s will remember him as part of the British version of the improv show “Whose Line Is It Anyway?” alongside Paul Merton.
The chap from confused.com on R4 Today at around 06:25 noting that 20mph limits are making a contribution to reductions in car insurance premiums because they make our roads safer.
We'll get real data from places like Wales in the next year or two.
Though where should already be data in the record, from places like Portsmouth, Cambridge, Nottingham, and possibly Hull.
London and Birmingham may be supplying data in 2-5 years.
Despite Moscow’s brutal war on Ukraine, the survey found that the number of Indian and Chinese people who considered Russia to be their country’s ally had actually grown marginally in the past year, while average US opinion of Russia had also improved.
By contrast, faced with Trump’s return, just one in five Europeans (22%) said they viewed the US as an ally, which is significantly fewer than the 31% who did so two years ago
The chap from confused.com on R4 Today at around 06:25 noting that 20mph limits are making a contribution to reductions in car insurance premiums because they make our roads safer.
We'll get real data from places like Wales in the next year or two.
Though where should already be data in the record, from places like Portsmouth, Cambridge, Nottingham, and possibly Hull.
London and Birmingham may be supplying data in 2-5 years.
Aren't the countervailing trends raising our premiums (electric cars being less repairable and so on) much larger?
I mean if I was a black bloke I would very much not like to walk past a statue of a racist slaver (are there any other kind) on my way to Starbucks each day. As a white bloke I don't like it either. We have all moved on get the statues down.
Churchill did more good than harm and there is a difference between having an unsavoury view of something and working to institute that view as a form of government.
I haven't. Statues are put there to commemorate historically significant people and events, not to give you the warm fuzzies as you go and get your coffee.
I would generally agree with that. But that isn't the case with most of the Confederate statues which was the subject of the discussion. They were mostly put up in the Jim Crow era to intimidate blacks not to commemorate historically significant events or people. They have nothing whatsoever to do with the civil war. That was just an excuse. Just look at the graph I linked to in an earlier post. It was plain deliberate intimidation of the 'superior' whites over the 'inferior' blacks.
It is no coincidence they were put up then and not earlier or later.
Genuine civil war statues I have no issue with in the context of the time (significant person or event).
The statue of Edward Colston was also not contemporary, it was Victorian. I have a personal theory that it was put up deliberately to antagonise the 'woke' of their day as part of the racial debates following the Morant Bay uprising. But it still tells us about the era it was put up. And a healthy society would have kept it and added another statue commemorating the slaves, so that future generations could see what the mores of each generation were, like rings in a tree. History doesn't give out prizes for getting rid of stuff - we do not venerate the sacking of Rome or the more recent destruction of the Buddhas by the Taliban, we mourn these things.
Sad news about the passing of actor and comedian Tony Slattery, only 65 years old. Those of us who grew up in the ‘90s will remember him as part of the British version of the improv show “Whose Line Is It Anyway?” alongside Paul Merton.
March would only be an "emergency" budget because Reeves, with great flourish, announced that there would be only one full fiscal event per year and that would be in Autumn.
They could raid Milliband's budget. Though they do need some big intervention on energy. Perhaps they will 'go realistic' on Net Zero?
On Trump's tariffs. There are conflicting reports.
On the one hand, we hear from the premier of Alberta, that they expect the tariffs to apply across the board, to everything, no exceptions.
On the other hand, there are many who earnestly believe they will be targeted only on strategic industries, and leave something like Warhammer models without an additional tariff.
And in the middle you have cynical old rogues who expect it all to be a racket, where exceptions can be bought for a very reasonable consideration.
Where do we think this is headed?
Call me cynical.
"As such, Congress often works with the President to set tariff policy by authorizing the President to negotiate trade agreements and to adjust tariffs in certain circumstances"
Sad news about the passing of actor and comedian Tony Slattery, only 65 years old. Those of us who grew up in the ‘90s will remember him as part of the British version of the improv show “Whose Line Is It Anyway?” alongside Paul Merton.
It would seem a lot of comedians have issues with depression and or drugs and alcohol and relationship failures as a result.
Indeed so, the stereotype of the sad clown is very much bourne out in reality. A lot of comedians come from troubled backgrounds, broken homes etc, and not from the Cambridge Footlights.
The entertainment industry in general has suffered from high rates of addiction for decades, a combination of the social environment, the temporary nature of the work, and easy availability of drink and drugs.
Sad news about the passing of actor and comedian Tony Slattery, only 65 years old. Those of us who grew up in the ‘90s will remember him as part of the British version of the improv show “Whose Line Is It Anyway?” alongside Paul Merton.
Sad news about the passing of actor and comedian Tony Slattery, only 65 years old. Those of us who grew up in the ‘90s will remember him as part of the British version of the improv show “Whose Line Is It Anyway?” alongside Paul Merton.
Sad news about the passing of actor and comedian Tony Slattery, only 65 years old. Those of us who grew up in the ‘90s will remember him as part of the British version of the improv show “Whose Line Is It Anyway?” alongside Paul Merton.
I mean if I was a black bloke I would very much not like to walk past a statue of a racist slaver (are there any other kind) on my way to Starbucks each day. As a white bloke I don't like it either. We have all moved on get the statues down.
Churchill did more good than harm and there is a difference between having an unsavoury view of something and working to institute that view as a form of government.
We have to suffer Butcher cumberland and other associated fcukwits, how do you think we northern slaves feel
Comments
"Only Yesterday" by Frederick Lewis Allen
"Roosevelt: The Lion and the Fox" by James MacGregor Burns (I have not gotten around to reading the "Soldier of Freedom" sequel, but plan to.)
"Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision" by Roberta Wohlstetter
In return, can any of you refer me to a good biography of John Bright? (If there isn't one, there should be.)
https://livinglondonhistory.com/why-is-the-statue-in-cavendish-square-missing/
Is it, in fact, over?
Was it Starmer’s secret intention all along, to pull out of it citing US disapproval?
It’s annoying to me how murky it’s been.
As a Forest fan, it gives me no joy to report that.
/liarmode
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifY4v3maKZY
Bill Wells & Aidan Moffat - The Copper Top
Which, if you don’t care about the ICJ or Commonwealth sentiment, it is.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20k6eqyzrwo
"Chair of miscarriages of justice review body quits"
https://x.com/electionmapsuk/status/1879206750500561384
Scottish Westminster Voting Intention:
SNP: 33% (+2)
LAB: 24% (-4)
RFM: 15% (+2)
CON: 14% (-1)
LDM: 9% (+3)
GRN: 4% (-1)
Via @Survation, 7-13 Jan.
Changes w/ 1-15 Nov.
I am sure your best friend will have the best of treatment
All the best
It's a bit different to the subsample you posted last week.
Slab back to 2015 levels and SNP still below 2015, 2017 and 2019 levels even if up a bit on 2024
Not that they were about to disappear or be replaced, but it was a rough year for them with the potential for it to spiral a bit more.
“Better to reign in Hell, than to serve in Heaven”
"Starbucks says people using its coffee shops must buy something
Coffee chain reverses policy introduced in North America in 2018 that lets anyone use its facilities"
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/14/starbucks-coffee-shops-buy-something-policy-north-america
My reading is that he was entirely sincere about this, and it fits with what we know of his character.
If you're playing that game, the organisation is already lost.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/01/15/south-korean-president-yoon-suk-yeol-detained-local-media-reports-.html
A new pamphlet from Mark Park and Jim Williams, about strategy for this Parliament:
What next for the Liberal Democrats?
Introduction
As we write this, three important processes are underway in our party. The general election review, chaired by Tim Farron, is nearing its completion, while the party’s policy review, chaired by Ed Davey, is at an early stage. So too is the party’s next strategy process, to update our strategy for this new Parliament. All three are important, but this pamphlet is aimed primarily at contributing to the debate around the third. It is more about psephology and electoral strategy than about policy or detailed operational lessons from the election.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/11aVzII74yXZ9GaneBXK-_nIHP_ow72guAiiZiRfNFEY/edit?tab=t.0
https://x.com/jurgen_nauditt/status/1879178953577140438
That means there’s time for the opposition parties to review, reflect and develop policies and communicate them for the next election when Labour will have to account for their record in Government which will be entertaining.
I’m expecting quite sober and boring offerings from both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats while Reform will try to promise everyone everything and will have to face scrutiny.
It may well be we are close to the high tide of modern populism and once that fails to deliver, there will be a shift back to a more consensual offering.
https://x.com/maria_avdv/status/1879257312122331258
https://x.com/evgen1232007/status/1879190979225469194
In other news, football club chairman forced to deny plans to sack the manager…
Without being AEP and predicting 30 of the last two recessions, it does appear that the Russian economy could be close to a tipping point if the war doesn’t end soon.
Trump and Putin is going to be an interesting dynamic, both of them clearly see themselves as the big dog, the strong man in the room. I suspect that Trump is clearly showing Putin who’s actually the big dog in the room, and that there’s an effectively limitless arsenal of weapons that could be headed to Ukraine if he doesn’t at least come to the table.
Now Russia and Ukraine will be very far apart when it comes to how they think the war should end, but at least some talking would be a good start. Ukraine’s starting point will be a restoration of the 1991 border and NATO membership, Russia’s starting point will be a freeze on current lines (except for Kursk of course). I suspect that the landing zone is more along the post-2014 borders, but with Donbass and Crimea as independent states and Russian frozen assets paying for the rebuillding of Ukraine.
It’s encouraging to see a bi-partisan approach evolving on foreign policy between the outgoing Biden and incoming Trump administrations. It may not last of course but it’s a positive step.
To matters domestic and the resignation of Tulip Siddiq, for all it’s been handled with characteristic Starmer ruthlessness, was avoidable and is a needless distraction set against the serious issues such as the crisis in SEND provision which has again reached a fair way up the agenda.
As with adult social care, special education needs provision is a huge and growing drain on local authority finances and resources.
Interested to see Surrey County Council’s Conservative leader Tim Oliver asking the Government to write off District and Borough Council debt as part of devolution. In his patch he has Woking and Spelthorne who are between them £3 billion in debt and expecting future unitary authorities (or a County wide authority which would be Oliver’s choice I suspect) to inherit and manage that debt seems like an unnecessary millstone.
He has the Sub Judice Out.
That would underline that local authorities are not responsible for the Councillors' actions - which is not a set of principles we need at a time of expected increased devolution.
MAGA has real contempt for all norms. Trump 47 is starting as it means to go on.
It's the end of the American century, as farce rather than tragedy.
Buckle up, it's going to be a stormy ride.
And the harder it becomes to get that 'win'. In fact, I reckon the only thing that will get him it is Trump. He cannot do it militarily without a heck of a lot of outside help; either directly or by withholding support to Ukraine.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/obituaries/2025/01/14/tony-slattery-channel-4-whose-line-anyway-comedian/
Just prior to Trump coming to power.
That way there's at least a chance that the next government would lead to a more prosperous country, rather than yet more of the same failed Blairite consensus we've had this century.
But I'll take what I can get.
Then unfortunately he discovered drink and drugs and apparently couldn't handle them.
The chap from confused.com on R4 Today at around 06:25 noting that 20mph limits are making a contribution to reductions in car insurance premiums because they make our roads safer.
We'll get real data from places like Wales in the next year or two.
Though where should already be data in the record, from places like Portsmouth, Cambridge, Nottingham, and possibly Hull.
London and Birmingham may be supplying data in 2-5 years.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/14/european-jitters-about-trump-20-not-shared-by-much-of-world-poll-finds?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Despite Moscow’s brutal war on Ukraine, the survey found that the number of Indian and Chinese people who considered Russia to be their country’s ally had actually grown marginally in the past year, while average US opinion of Russia had also improved.
By contrast, faced with Trump’s return, just one in five Europeans (22%) said they viewed the US as an ally, which is significantly fewer than the 31% who did so two years ago
NEW THREAD
"As such, Congress often works with the President to set tariff policy by authorizing the President to negotiate trade agreements and to adjust tariffs in certain circumstances"
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11030#:~:text=Who Makes U.S. Tariff Policy,foreign policy and trade promotion.
The entertainment industry in general has suffered from high rates of addiction for decades, a combination of the social environment, the temporary nature of the work, and easy availability of drink and drugs.
Just John Sessions and now Tony Slattery.